Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 468 (JHR)

Abhimanu Kumar v. State of Jharkhand

2012-03-28

D.N.PATEL

body2012
Order 1. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has appeared for the post of Constable in pursuance of the public advertisement. The petitioner successfully cleared all the tests taken by the respondents for the post, in question, but only because of the height of the petitioner, i.e. 177 cms as per respondents’ measurement, the petitioner has not been appointed. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that initially, the height of the present petitioner was measured by the respondents at 179.5 cms and therefore, the petitioner had shown his willingness to go before the Civil Surgeon, Giridih for the measurement of his height and therefore, a direction was given by this Court vide order dated 29th February, 2012 to the Civil Surgeon, Giridih to measure the height of the present petitioner upon deposition of Rs.1,000/before this Court. Following the direction of this Court, the petitioner approached the Civil Surgeon, Giridih alongwith cloured photograph and other identification proof and the Civil Surgeon, Giridih measured the height of the present petitioner and tendered a report before this Court mentioning therein that the petitioner’s height is 179.3 cms and therefore, let a suitable direction be given to the concerned respondents authorities to consider the height of the petitioner as 179.3 cms. instead of 177 cms and the petitioner may be appointed by the respondents because other similarly situated candidates having lesser height than the present petitioner have got appointment letter. 3. Counsel for the State submitted that the report of the Civil Surgeon, Giridih reveals that the height of the petitioner is 179.3 cms and therefore, let a suitable direction may be given to consider the case of the petitioner considering the height of the present petitioner as measured by the Civil Surgeon and to allot respective marks towards the height of the present petitioner and if the petitioner secures more than the marks of the lastly selected candidate in the category from which the petitioner has appeared, then the petitioner will be given appointment letter for the post in question. 4. Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the petitioner had applied for the post of Constable in pursuance of the public advertisement, issued by the respondents. 4. Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the petitioner had applied for the post of Constable in pursuance of the public advertisement, issued by the respondents. Petitioner successfully cleared all the tests taken by the respondents, but he has not been appointed only on the ground that the height of the present petitioner, as measured by the respondents, is 177 cms. Initially, the height of the present petitioner was measured by the respondents and was found to be 179.5 cms. Though there is no provision of re-measurement again and again, but, for any reason, the height of the present petitioner was remeasured and was reduced by the respondents and therefore, this Court passed an order on 29th February, 2012 directing the petitioner to deposit Rs.1,000/before this Court because he was alleging that his height is higher than what was measured by the respondents and upon deposition of Rs. 1,000/before this Court, the height of the present petitioner has been remeasured by the Civil Surgeon, Giridih and a report dated 21st March, 2012 has been received in this Court, which is on record and as per the said report, the height of the present petitioner is 179.3 cms. 5. It further appears that the contention of the present petitioner about the height is correct and therefore, I hereby, direct respondent no. 4 to allot appropriate marks for the height of the present petitioner, which is found to be 179.3 cms., as per the report given by the Civil Surgeon, Giridih dated 21st March, 2012 and if the petitioner secures more marks than the last selected candidate in the General Category, he shall be given appointment. I hereby also direct respondent no. 4 that if the marks of the present petitioner and the marks of the last selected candidate are found to be equal then in that case, criteria laid down for the last selected candidates shall be followed and the candidate shall be appointed, as per the guidelines given in the public advertisement. 6. This exercise will be completed by respondent no. 6. This exercise will be completed by respondent no. 4 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of an order of this Court and if the decision is taken in favour of the present petitioner, within a period of two weeks thereafter, the actual appointment shall be given to the petitioner. The petitioner will not be claiming any monetary benefit for lately given appointment, if at all, decision is taken in his favour. 7. This writ petition is disposed of, in view of the aforesaid directions. Petition disposed of.