Order Petitioner in this writ petition has prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of constable since according to him, he comes within the zone of consideration being qualified and declared successful in the test conducted by the respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had appeared at the test and he does possess not only academic qualification but also the qualifications as prescribed for physical test including his height. According to his own assessment, on the basis of the height, the petitioner should have been awarded 17 marks (11 for his height and 6 for his academic qualification), as per the guidelines prescribed. Yet, the petitioner has been eliminated on the ground that he has not qualified on the basis of the measurement of his height. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while raising the dispute on the recording of the measurement of the petitioner's height, states that in the final merit chart (Annexure-1 to the counter affidavit) the measurement of height of the petitioner as recorded by the respondents is incorrect and therefore prays that the respondents be directed to re-measure the height of the petitioner and if it is found to be within the eligibility criteria as prescribed, the petitioner's candidature should be considered. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents, by adverting to the counter affidavit filed by the respondents and to Annexure-A, which is the relevant portion of the master chart, containing the details of marks obtained by the individual candidates, submits that the measurement of height of the petitioner was recorded in the chart in presence of the petitioner and the petitioner had appended his signature thereto without raising any objection whatsoever and therefore it cannot be now disputed by the petitioner that the measurement of his height as recorded in the aforesaid chart was erroneous. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner raises objection to the above contention raised on behalf of the respondents and states that Annexure-A as produced by the respondents does not contain the signature of the petitioner and, as a matter of fact, even if signatures of the candidates were obtained, such signatures were taken by way of a formal requirement and the candidates were not shown the actual notings at the relevant time. 6. 6. Be that as it may, since the petitioner is emphatic that he falls within the zone of consideration for appointment by virtue of his actual height, in all fairness, it would be appropriate to give the petitioner an opportunity to satisfy himself before the respondent authority about the correctness or otherwise of the measurement of his height as recorded in the master chart (Annexure-A). 7. Accordingly, the respondents no. 2 and 4 are directed to fix a date and time, intimate the same to the petitioner to be present on the said date and time, measure the petitioner's height in his presence, record the same and obtain his signature for authentication/confirmation and if the petitioner is found eligible as per the criteria prescribed, then the respondents shall consider his candidature for appointment. In case, the petitioner is not found eligible, he shall have no ground/grievance to agitate for any further relief in the matter. This exercise shall be carried out by the respondents no. 2 and 4 within a period of four weeks from the date of submission of a copy of this order. 8. Let a copy of this order be given to the counsel for the respondent-State 9. With the above observation, this application is disposed of.