Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 25 (AP)

State Of Andhra Pradesh v. Arugollu Durga Prasad

2024-01-03

G.NARENDAR, NYAPATHY VIJAY

body2024
JUDGMENT : G.Narendar, J. Heard Sri G.V.S.Kishore Kumar, learned Government Pleader for Services-I (“Ld. G.P. for S-I”) appearing for the Appellants and Sri Jada Sravan Kumar, learned Counsel for the Respondents/Writ Petitioners. 2. The Appellants are the State represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Home; the State Level Police Recruitment Board represented by its Chairman, and the Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Appellants are before this Court in this intra-Court Appeal being aggrieved by the order, dated 17.11.2023, passed by the learned Single Judge, on I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.29757 of 2023. 4. The Respondents 1 to 24 are the Petitioners and candidates, who have participated in the recruitment process initiated by the Appellants, more particularly, the 2nd Appellant, to fill-up the posts of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee (SCT) Sub-Inspectors of Police (Civil) (Men and Women) in Police Department and also to fill-up similar posts in the Reserve Police. 5. The parties are referred to by their nomenclature before the learned Single Judge for the purpose of brevity and convenience. 6. The case of the Petitioners in a nutshell is that they are aspirants and applicants to the posts noted supra. That the Respondent-State had stipulated stringent eligibility conditions with regard to the age and physical fitness standards, including height, etc. That the recruitment process involved multiple stages including preliminary written test, physical measurements test (“P.M.T.) and endurance test; that the Petitioners had trained hard to enhance their capabilities to perform well in the selection process and thereby ensure selection based on the merit of their performance. The aspirants/Petitioners all claim to be unemployed and wholly reliant on the employment opportunity in the above posts. It is the case of the Petitioners that they had qualified in the prelims and the endurance test and also in the P.M.T; that despite having completed all the stages of selection successfully, they were issued with rejection orders rejecting their candidature. That the candidates/Petitioners underwent P.M.T. at various places in the Offices of the D.I.G. of Police, i.e., at Eluru, Visakhapatnam, Kurnool and Guntur; that the rejection orders have been issued on the ground that the Petitioners failed in the P.M.T. i.e., that they did not measure upto the minimum height stipulated and in some cases they did not meet the required chest expansion. That all the Petitioners in the instant Writ Petition, have primarily been rejected on the ground that they did not measure upto the minimum height stipulated under the selection notification. It is in this background the Writ Petitions came to be preferred. 7. In the Writ Petition, the Petitioners also preferred an Interlocutory Application i.e., I.A.No.1 of 2023 wherein the Petitioners not only sought for the suspension of the orders of rejecting their candidature, but further sought for a Court monitored independent expert committee to manually measure the heights of various Petitioners. The learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties, has been pleased to allow the said I.A., and was further pleased to stay the announcement of results in respect of other candidates. While allowing the application, the learned Single Judge has been pleased to place reliance on the heights recorded during the previous selection process of 2018 and has pointed out an instance in this regard i.e. with regard to the candidate at Sl.No.21, wherein during the previous selection process, the height of the candidate was recorded at 169.1 c.m. Aggrieved by the same, the Appellants have preferred the instant Writ Appeal. 8. The order rendered on the said I.A. was sought to be resisted on multiple grounds. In fact, it was contended that the learned Single Judge has virtually attempted to carry out the selection process. Though several grounds are raised, the events that transpired after the matter was taken up for hearing paved with the way for certain developments, which are evidenced by the daily orders passed in the Appeal. One more development of note, which forced the Court to think differently, was the medical certificates that were produced by the Petitioners before this Court. It is relevant to note that the certificates were obtained after the filing of the writ petition and in fact contradicted some of the measurements relied upon by the Petitioners themselves. It is pertinent to point out that the main feature of the medical certificate was the prominence given to the recording of height. In fact, all the medical certificates were canvassed by the Petitioners before this Court on the said aspect only. 9. It is pertinent to point out that the main feature of the medical certificate was the prominence given to the recording of height. In fact, all the medical certificates were canvassed by the Petitioners before this Court on the said aspect only. 9. In fact, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners had contended that the certificates were obtained after the orders of the learned Single Judge with the sole intention of confronting and disproving the heights recorded by the Respondents during the P.M.T. Having looked into the certificates, we found that there was variance even with the heights recorded in 2018, which was the basis for the learned Single Judge granting the interim relief. 10. This Court, observing that the crux of the arguments submitted on behalf of the Petitioners was centering around the act of taking measurements. We queried the Ld. G. P. (for S-I) as to whether the P.M.T. has been video-graphed. The Ld. G.P. (for S-I), on instructions, submitted that the selection process (P.M.T.) had been video-graphed and that the same by itself would disprove the allegations leveled against the selection committee. The Appellants offered to produce the same. Accordingly, arrangements were made on 24.11.2023 to view the videos in the Court hall itself i.e. in the presence of the Petitioners, who were present, and their Counsel and the Learned G.P. The daily orders commencing from that date i.e., 24.11.2023 and the subsequent daily orders ending with 21.12.2023 are clear reflection of the nature of hearing that transpired, which read as follows: “Dt. 24.11.2023: “Today, learned Government Pleader for Services-I has produced the video recorded by the Department while carrying out the exercise of measuring the height and chest measurements. We have seen the procedure being carried out in respect of the candidates while measuring the height. In our prima facie opinion, we found it to be fair. Yet, the learned counsel for the respondents/candidates would vehemently contend that the same is carried out unfairly and would try to place reliance on the measurements said to have been recorded during an early round of selection process. It is seen that the process had been taken further, wherein several thousands of candidates completed the written examination also. Despite the same, the process of selection appears to have been a hurdle. It is seen that the process had been taken further, wherein several thousands of candidates completed the written examination also. Despite the same, the process of selection appears to have been a hurdle. In order to give a quietus, the Bench has queried the counsels as to whether the exercise can be carried out in the Court Hall itself in the presence of both the learned counsels and the Bench to which they have agreed. We have also put the learned counsel for the respondents on notice in the event the measurements recorded are found to be fairly correct, the candidates, who have disputing the same, shall individually pay costs quantified at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per candidate. Hence, we deem it necessary to give an opportunity to the learned counsel for the respondents to secure instructions with regard to their willingness to participate in the exercise and their willingness to pay the costs, if their contentions regarding the measurements are found to be erroneous and incorrect. List on 29.11.2023.” Dt. 04.12.2023 “The matter was listed on 24.11.2023 and it was ordered that the measurement exercise would be carried out on the next date i.e., on 29.11.2023. On 29.11.2023, the case was not listed and out of list mentioning was made by the learned counsel for the respondents and the matter was directed to be listed today. Yet again, we find that the matter is not listed and today morning again the learned counsel for the respondents was constrained to make a mention for lunch motion. In view of the fact that 19 candidates have turned up agreeing to submit themselves to the condition imposed by this Court directing the exercise to be carried out on 29.11.2023 i.e., payment of cost Rs.1,00,000/- in the event measurements are found to be correct. Today, learned counsel for the respondents submits that he has been instructed by the candidates to submit that they are ready and willing to pay the cost as directed by this Court and comply with the condition imposed. Today, learned counsel for the respondents submits that he has been instructed by the candidates to submit that they are ready and willing to pay the cost as directed by this Court and comply with the condition imposed. Learned Government Pleader for Services-III submits that the learned Government Pleader for Services-I is appearing in the matter and as the matter was not listed today and as the lunch motion was not intimated to them in time there is some constraint for the committee members (06 in number) to be present before the Court and that the committee members including the chairman has expressed the desire to be present in the Court during the time the exercise is carried out and hence he prays for an accommodation till today. Submission is placed on record. There appears to be an anomaly in the listing and the candidates cannot be faulted if they are present before the Court day. Be that as it may, this Court proposes to make appropriate orders with regard to compensating the candidates in the event they are successful. List on 05.12.2023 at 02.15 PM. The Doctor attached to High Court Dispensary is also requested to assist and carry out the exercise as ordered by this Court.” Dt. 05-12-2023 “Heard Learned Counsel Sri G.V.S.Kishore Kumar, Learned Government Pleader for Services-I for the Appellants and Sri Jada Sravan Kumar, Learned Counsel for the respondents. Dr.Pauvel Jetha, Civil Assistant Surgeon attached to the Civil Dispensary, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati is present as requested by this Court. Mr.Athul Singh, Chairman, S.L.P.R.B accompanied by other Members of the Selection Committee and Dr.Sk.Hameeda, M.B.B.S., Medical Officer, DM & HO, Guntur are also present. Height Measurement Scales of Selection Committee and High Court Dispensary were brought to the Court to carryout measurement exercise. Pursuant to our earlier orders dated 24.11.2023 and 04.12.2023, out of the Nineteen (19) candidates, three (3) candidates were examined viz., 1) Arugollu Durga Prasad, 2) Koppada David Raju and 3) Nalagatla Mallikharjuna. The heights were cross-checked by the Doctor of High Court Dispensary and Dr.SK.Hameeda, Medical Officer attached to DM & HO, Mr.G.Konda Reddy, Assistant Controller of Legal Metrology Department, Guntur, Mr.B.Gangadhar, S.A., (P.D), ZPHS, Yanamadala. We found that the measurements are matching with the heights recorded during the Physical Measurement Test (PMT). The heights were cross-checked by the Doctor of High Court Dispensary and Dr.SK.Hameeda, Medical Officer attached to DM & HO, Mr.G.Konda Reddy, Assistant Controller of Legal Metrology Department, Guntur, Mr.B.Gangadhar, S.A., (P.D), ZPHS, Yanamadala. We found that the measurements are matching with the heights recorded during the Physical Measurement Test (PMT). In fact, the use of the Measurement Scale maintained in the High Court Dispensary was strenuously objected to by the Learned Government Pleader for Services-I on the short ground that the Scales are required to be authenticated by the Legal Metrology Department. The objections were also overruled by this Court and the Measurement Tests were directed to be conducted on both the Scales in the presence of persons noted supra. For one candidate by name Mr.Koppada David Raju both of us have personally checked the measurements on both the Scales. The Tests were carried out on the Scales brought by the respondents and also the High Court Dispensary. There is no variation in the measurements. At this stage, we once again queried the Learned Counsel for the writ petitioners as to whether they still insist for continuation of the PMT on the other candidates in view of the stringent condition imposed while passing the order for holding the Test. This Court ventured upon this exercise only to give a quietus to this simmering doubt of there being manipulations. The exercise, prima facie, has conclusively demonstrated that the allegation of there being any foul play in the measuring exercise was without any basis. We also deemed this exercise as necessary in order to ensure that public confidence is not eroded in the selection process, more so, in view of the selection being to the Police force in whose hands the citizens place their life and limbs for security and safety. Though the exercise was objected to by the Learned Government Pleader for Services-I on the ground that it is an Expert’s job, keeping in view the elementary and basic nature of the exercise, we overruled the same. In fact, while doing such exercise, we had put on notice the writ petitioners with regard to the cost/penalty they would be required to pay in the event their allegation stands derailed by the process. The condition was also reiterated yesterday when the mention for Lunch Motion was made by the Learned Counsel for the writ petitioners. In fact, while doing such exercise, we had put on notice the writ petitioners with regard to the cost/penalty they would be required to pay in the event their allegation stands derailed by the process. The condition was also reiterated yesterday when the mention for Lunch Motion was made by the Learned Counsel for the writ petitioners. When the matter was taken up in the afternoon, the respondents were represented by Mr.V.K. Naidu, Learned Government Pleader for Services-III. Learned Counsel for the writ petitioners was once again put on notice and he assured the Court that the writ petitioners are ready and willing to pay the cost/penalty that may be imposed as stipulated earlier and it is pertinent to note that the candidates were also present. Today, after the exercise has been partially completed, we have put across our view that the measurements recorded today and earlier are tallying with each other and we have queried as to whether he still insists for continuing the exercise to which the Learned Counsel for writ petitioners submitted that they have placed into the Court certain material papers like Medical Certificates issued by the various Government Hospitals across the State. A bare look at the same does not inspire confidence in this Court. Be that as it may. On a query, the Learned Counsel for the writ petitioners would submit that none of the writ petitioners are in a position to pay or deposit the cost/penalty that may be imposed in view of the orders dated 24.11.2023 and 04.12.2023. When this Court suggested that the exercise then be abandoned, he would vehemently argue to canvass the case to be considered on the strength of the Medical Certificates produced along with the additional memo. We have perused the same. The Certificates, prima facie, do not inspire confidence in the Court. Hence, we direct Mr.G.Pala Raju, IGP, SCZ, Guntur Range/Chief Superintendent to take up the Medical Certificates produced along with the Additional Memo dated 28.11.2023 for investigation. Mr.Ch.Vijaya Kumar, Inspector, S.P.F, A.P. High Court is directed to collect the Original Medical Certificates said to be in the possession of the writ petitioners and hand over them to the IGP by today. The IGP shall investigate and submit a Report regarding the authenticity of the same. Report to be submitted to this Court by 13.12.2023. The writ petitioners shall be present before this Court on 13.12.2023. The IGP shall investigate and submit a Report regarding the authenticity of the same. Report to be submitted to this Court by 13.12.2023. The writ petitioners shall be present before this Court on 13.12.2023. In view of the developments, we deem it appropriate not to continue with the order of suspension passed by the Learned Single Judge on 17.11.2023 in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.29757 of 2023. List this case on 13.12.2023.” Dt.15.12.2023: “List the matter on 19.12.2023.” Dt.19.12.2023: “On 15.12.2023, this Court had accepted the submission of learned counsel for the Respondents/Writ Petitioners to file affidavits unconditionally apologizing for their conduct. Today it is seen that a common affidavit signed by one of the candidate alone is file and the same is rejected. Compliance by 21.12.2023.” 21.12.2023 “I.A.No.3 of 2023 We have perused the affidavits filed today. On perusal, it is seen that the deponents are attempting to place on record some amount of justification for their conduct, despite this Court having put them on notice that any failure in the exercise will lead to serious consequences. In fact, the Court indicated imposition of Rs.1,00,000/- per candidate in the event of their failure in the exercise. The deponents agreed and having failed are now praying the Court to waive the same on the grounds of poverty and unemployment etc. The attempt to justify their action is not acceptable to the Court. Learned counsel for the applicants makes a prayer to permit them to withdraw the petition and file a better affidavit by 26.12.2023. List on 26.12.2023.” 11. This Court taking note of the strong resistance to the act of recording physical measurements during the P.M.T. suggested to the parties as to whether it would be acceptable, if the P.M.T. was conducted right in the Court Hall in the presence of the Judges and the stake holders, to which, both parties readily agreed and, thereafter, started the saga of carrying out measurements. This Court in order to assuage any misgivings and to lend credibility to the process, permitted the measurements not only with the height scale used by the Respondents, but also summoned the height scale used in the High Court Dispensary. This Court in order to assuage any misgivings and to lend credibility to the process, permitted the measurements not only with the height scale used by the Respondents, but also summoned the height scale used in the High Court Dispensary. Initially, both the scales were checked and the difference was in the range of about one millimeter between the two scales i.e., the heights of the policemen, the doctor and the nursing staff were checked on both scales and the differences were observed. Thereafter, the Court asked the Petitioners to volunteer for undergoing measurements of their heights. The heights of three of the Petitioners/candidates viz., 1) Arugollu Durga Prasad, 2) Koppada David Raju and 3) Nalagatla Mallikharjuna, were measured in both the scales, after which, it became apparent that the 2018 height measurements touted by the Petitioners as their ace had started crumbling and it was found that the heights recorded during the current selection process matched with the heights that were recorded during the measurements carried out in our presence and they were in the region of the heights recorded during 2018 selection process. At this stage, the candidates were reminded of the order, dated 24.11.2023, and the order, dated 04.12.2023, and the affidavits filed by them agreeing to pay costs of Rs.1.00 Lakh in the event their allegations are found to be untrue. Upon which, the remaining candidates through their Counsel informed the Court that they do not want to press further and seek re-measurement of their heights. Thereafter, this Court started querying about the medical certificates that were obtained by the Petitioners and placed before the Division Bench after commencement of the hearing by the Division Bench. An Officer with the 3rd Respondent viz., Mr.G.Pala Raju, IGP, SCZ, Guntur Range/Chief Superintendent, was directed to conduct an enquiry with the respective medical officers, who had issued the said certificates, and submit a report to the Court explaining the circumstances in which the certificates were issued. The statements made by the Medical Officers, who have affixed their signatures to the medical certificates reflects deep rooted malice. The contents are not merely alarming, but a suggestive out of a systematic manner in which the loopholes in the system have been exploited by unscrupulous people like the Petitioners. The statements made by the Medical Officers, who have affixed their signatures to the medical certificates reflects deep rooted malice. The contents are not merely alarming, but a suggestive out of a systematic manner in which the loopholes in the system have been exploited by unscrupulous people like the Petitioners. A uniform feature of the explanation offered by the medical officers is that the measurements were made by the nursing staff and others in the office and they had simply relied upon the same and affixed their signatures. Though this Court had a mind to direct to initiate disciplinary action, yet, the Court desisted from ordering any further enquiry or action against the medical officers in the fond hope that the medical officers, being highly educated people, would take the opportunity to reform themselves and act in a manner that would strengthen the hands of the State and not act in a manner detrimental to the interest of the State. 12. As recorded in the daily orders, the Petitioners started pleading in the Court not to impose the proposed costs. They sought excuse on the ground that their main attempts to manipulate the system only out of their desire to hold themselves and the family out of poverty and in this regard they were mislead in the believing that all would be well and though initially various legal grounds had been raised and canvassed by the Appellants and the Respondents, in view of the subsequent developments and in view of the fact that the Respondents have accepted the reality of they not being eligible and the Respondents and their Counsel having conceded to their ineligibility, we do not deem it necessary to delve further on the legality of the impugned order. 13. The text of common affidavit of the Petitioners/Respondents 1 to 24, dated 16.12.2023 and the better affidavit of 1st Petitioner/1st Respondent, dated 22.12.2023, read as under: “AFFIDAVIT BY THE RESPONDENTS I, Arugollu Durga Prasad, S/o.Venkata Narayudu, Age:32 R/O.D-No.1-309, Talluru Post, Gandepalli Mandal, East Godavari Dist., Andhra Pradesh, Regd No: 5157160, do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely states as follows: 1. I submit that, I am the deponent herein and petitioner in the above writ petition and as such I am well acquainted with the facts of the case. 2. I submit that, I am the deponent herein and petitioner in the above writ petition and as such I am well acquainted with the facts of the case. 2. It is submitted that the present Writ Appeal is being filed seeking a relief that the Hon'ble court may be pleased to set aside the order dt. 17.11.2023 passed in I.A. No. 1 of 2023 in WP No 29757 of 2023 and pass such other order or orders as it deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 3. It is humbly submitted that the respondents herein have filed the Writ Petition challenging the action of the respondent no.2 in issuing the impugned rejection orders issued in i) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-07, ii) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect. 1/2022-05, iii) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-08, iv) Rc.No. 163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-11, v) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-40, vi) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-44, vii) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-47, viii) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-48, ix) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-54, x) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-58 xi) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-60, xii) Rc.No. 163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-75, xiii) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-32, xiv) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-93, xv) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-15, xvi) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-12, xvii) Rc.No. 163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-87, xviii) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-4, xix) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-71, & Ors., dated 20.10.2023, rejecting the candidatures of the petitioners during the re-measurement of height pursuant to the orders of this Hon'ble court in W.P.Nos.26479 and 26653 of 2023 dated 13.10.2023 despite the fact that all of the petitioners were fully qualified in the measure of height & chest in earlier recruitment of 2019 conducted by the same respondent board as illegal, vindictive, arbitrary and in gross violation of the Fundamental Rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, 21 besides being in violation of the Principles of Natural Justice and consequently set aside the impugned rejection orders, dated 20.10.2023 by the respondent no.4 duly allowing the petitioners to participate in the further stages of the recruitment. 4. It is humbly submitted that the respondents are unemployed persons, being unemployed, their family's financial situations is affecting them. It is humbly submitted that earlier the respondents have applied for SCT SI (Civil) as per Notification R.C.No 216/SLRPB/RECT-1/2018, Dt: 01-10-2018 of Chairman SLRPB Andhra Pradesh for the year 2019 and have qualified in prelims and physical measurements in that notification, but didn't get the job because they didn't get merit marks in main exam. All the respondents herein successfully met all the eligibility criteria and qualifications specified in the official notification. 5. All the respondents herein successfully met all the eligibility criteria and qualifications specified in the official notification. 5. It is further humbly submitted that as the respondent's candidature was rejected during the Physical Measurement Test (PMT), which measurement of height is different to the very measurement done by the authorities in the earlier year of recruitment. Challenging the same, the respondent petitioners have filed the W.P. No.29757 of 2023. 6. It is further humbly submitted that in the said writ petition, the respondents herein have filed I.A.No.1 of 2023 seeking a relief that the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to temporarily suspend the impugned orders issued in Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022- 07, ii) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect. 1/2022-05, iii) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-08, iv) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-11, v) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-40, vi) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect. 1/2022-44, vii) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect. 1/2022-47, viii) Rc.No. 163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-48, ix) Re.No.163/SLPRB/Rect. 1/2022-54, x) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect. 1/2022-58, xi) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-60, xii) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-75, xiii) Rc.No. 163/SLPRB/Rect. 1/2022-32, xiv) Rc.No. 163/SLPRB/Rect. 1/2022-93, xv) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-15, xvi) Rc.No. 163/SLPRB/Rect. 1/2022-12, xvii) Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-87, xviii) Rc.No. 163/SUPRB/Rect.1/2022-4, xix) Rc. No. 163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022-71, & 0rs, dated 20.10.2023, duly appointing court monitored independent expert committee for measuring the height of the petitioners manually without intervention of the authorities concerned in any manner in the interest of justice, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 7. It is further humbly submitted that the Hon'ble single judge was pleased to pass the following orders in LA.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.29757 of 2023. The said orders is extracted herein as follows: “7. This Court is unable to countenance as to how the heights of the individual candidates have been so drastically reduced from 2018 Recruitment Notification to the current Recruitment Notification. In fact, the candidate at serial No.21 in the table also is found to have been disqualified on the ground of height; while his height is shown under 2018 Recruitment Notification as 169.1cms respectively. 8. Under these circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to allow this Interlocutory Application.” 8. It is further humbly submitted that pursuant to the above orders, the appellants herein have filed the present writ appeal challenging the orders dated 17.11.2023. During the admission of the writ appeal, the Hon'ble court was pleased to order for the measurement of the heights in the premises of the Hon'ble court under the supervision of the Hon'ble court. It is further humbly submitted that pursuant to the above orders, the appellants herein have filed the present writ appeal challenging the orders dated 17.11.2023. During the admission of the writ appeal, the Hon'ble court was pleased to order for the measurement of the heights in the premises of the Hon'ble court under the supervision of the Hon'ble court. The respondents herein have agreed to the same as the respondents were qualified by the board in the earlier year of recruitment. 9. It is further humbly submitted that in the meanwhile, upon the instructions of the counsel for the respondents, the respondents herein have got their heights measured again by the certified medical practitioners which measurement was done with the help of the wall and some of them were issued duly measuring the heights of the respondents. It is further humbly submitted that during the conduct of the height measurement exercise by the Hon'ble court, it was found out that the heights of the individuals were not up to the standard of measure fixed in the notification as such the Hon'ble court has ordered for an enquiry to be done in respect of the certificates issued by the government doctors and has adjourned the matter to 15.12.2023 duly suspending the order passed by the Hon'ble single judge in LA.No.1 of 2023 in W.P. No. 29757 of 2023, dated 17.11.2023. 10. It is further humbly submitted that on 15.12.2023, this Hon'ble court has posted the matter for orders on 19.12.2023. During the hearing of which, the Hon'ble court have ventured to impose penalty of initiating the prosecution against all the respondents for the mischief and has proceeded for imposing of the penalty. However, the respondents have sought the liberty of the Hon'ble court to exonerate the respondents from the said punishment. 11. In this regard, it is humbly submitted that we are all poo unemployed and in an disadvantageous position and could be bear the punishment being imposed by this Hon'ble court an tender our unconditional apologies for all the actions. However, the respondents have sought the liberty of the Hon'ble court to exonerate the respondents from the said punishment. 11. In this regard, it is humbly submitted that we are all poo unemployed and in an disadvantageous position and could be bear the punishment being imposed by this Hon'ble court an tender our unconditional apologies for all the actions. It is further humbly submitted that the action of the respondents is a mere act to prove the bonafide prudence on part of the respondents but not to misuse the precious time and procedure of this Hon'ble court and the Hon'ble court may be pleased to accept the unconditional apology being tendered by the respondents in this behalf and to kindly exonerate from the punishment being imposed. It is prayed that, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to accept the unconditional apology being tendered by the respondents in this behalf and to kindly exonerate from the punishment being imposed and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” “BETTER AFFIDAVIT BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 I, Arugollu Durga Prasad, S/o.Venkata Narayudu, Age:32 R/O.D-No.1-309, Talluru Post, Gandepalli Mandal, East Godavari Dist., Andhra Pradesh. Regd No: 5157160., do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely states as follows: 1. I submit that, I am the deponent herein and respondent No.1 in the above writ appeal and as such I am well acquainted with the facts of the case. 2. It is submitted that the present Writ Appeal is being filed by the appellants/respondents challenging the impugned order passed in I.A. No. 1 of 2023 in WP No 29757 of 2023 and pass such other order or orders as it deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 3. It is humbly submitted that during the admission of the writ appeal, the Hon'ble court was pleased to order for the measurement of the heights in the premises of the Hon'ble court and cautioned to my counsel in case the candidate fail, they would have to pay a fine of amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) per each individual and pleased to grant time to get instructions. It is submitted that the said fact was informed by my counsel and upon my instructions, consent affidavits were filed duly endorsing the same that in case the candidate fails in the height measurement test they would be ready to pay fine of Rs 1,00,000/- as ordered by this Hon'ble court. 4. It is submitted that during the physical measurement test which was taken before this Hon'ble court and I was not qualified in the said test, as such the Hon'ble court was proceeded to impose the fine amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) at this juncture I have begged for the pardon of the Hon'ble court in view of my inability to pay the fine owing to my poor economic background and prayed to take lenient view in view of my weaker economic background and was carried away by the hopeless situation. 5. In this regard, it is humbly submitted that I am poor, unemployed and in an disadvantageous position and could not bear the punishment being imposed by this Hon'ble court and tender my unconditional apologies for all the actions of mine, which are not motivated or ill or capricious but done due to the sheer ignorance and due to the disadvantageous position. 6. It is further humbly submitted that I never have any intention to misuse the precious time and procedure of this Hon'ble court and I have huge respect towards this Hon'ble court and I bow down for my sheer ignorance and may be pleased to accept my unconditional apology and to kindly reduce the quantum of punishment from the punishment being imposed by this Hon’ble Court. It is prayed that, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to accept my unconditional apology tendered and to kindly reduce the quantum of the punishment being imposed and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 14. In fact, the exercise carried out by this Court has virtually taken away the foundation of the Writ Petition itself. It is not in dispute that the focal argument and the basis for canvassing the Writ Petition itself was the alleged measurements during the previous selection process of 2018 which has been proved to be wholly incorrect and wrong. In fact, the exercise carried out by this Court has virtually taken away the foundation of the Writ Petition itself. It is not in dispute that the focal argument and the basis for canvassing the Writ Petition itself was the alleged measurements during the previous selection process of 2018 which has been proved to be wholly incorrect and wrong. This Court had carried out the exercise, as narrated above, only with the intention of ensuring the purity of the selection process and to remove any clouds hovering over the selection process on account of the sustained campaign carried out by the Petitioners and other similarly situated persons and also to instill confidence in the public in the selection process carried out by the Authorities. 15. The efforts by this Court have not been in vain. The exercise carried out by the Court has established the selection process is trustworthy and the apprehension and fears expressed by the Petitioners are unfounded and baseless. That apart, as noted supra, the very foundation of the Writ Petition, as recorded by the learned Single Judge, i.e., the 2018 measurements are found to be incorrect and stand falsified. In that view of the matter, the order of the learned Single Judge requires to be interfered with. 16. After we commenced the hearing with regard to imposition of the penalty as proposed by this Court, under the order, dated 04.12.2023, a fervent plea was made to pardon the Petitioners and when queried as to what should be the alternative, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, after consultation with the Petitioners, submitted that the Petitioners would render social service. 17. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is allowed and the order appealed is set aside. The Petitioners i.e. the Respondents herein being the Respondents 1 to 24 are directed to render voluntary service in any Government Hospital for a period of fifteen days. We further direct Sri G. Pala Raju, I.G.P., SCZ, Guntur Range/Chief Superintendent, to ensure that the Petitioners/Respondents 1 to 24 render social service for a period of 15 clear days in any of the Government Hospital in the State. The Petitioners shall report before the I.G.P., SCZ, Guntur Range/Chief Superintendent, within ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. The Petitioners shall report before the I.G.P., SCZ, Guntur Range/Chief Superintendent, within ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. The I.G.P. shall talk to the Head of the Government Hospital chosen by the Petitioners/Respondents 1 to 24 and forward the details of the Petitioners and the reporting date. After the Petitioners/Respondents 1 to 24 complete 15 days of social service, the Head of the Hospital shall issue a certificate certifying the same. The Petitioners shall, thereafter, submit the same to the Registrar General, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, who in turn shall put up the same in the said file. In the event, the Petitioners/Respondents 1 to 24 fail to render the said social service as agreed upto by them, the same shall be treated as a deliberate disobedience of the orders of the Court and the Registrar General, High Court of A.P., is directed to initiate suo moto contempt proceedings against such of those Respondents/Petitioners and prosecute them for the same. 18. The Writ Appeal and all the I.As. stand ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.