STATE OF U P Vs. PARAM HANSH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE controversy involved in all these special appeals is identical and, therefore, they are being disposed of by a common order. Special Appeal No. 91 of 2000 (State of U.P. and others v. Param Hansh Singh) shall be treated as leading case.

(2.) AN advertisement was issued on 8.4.1997 inviting applications for the post of Excise Constables in the Excise Department of State of U.P. The applications were to be submitted before the respective Divisional Deputy Excise Commissioners. In pursuance of the advertisement, the respondents in the appeal (writ petitioners) applied for the post. A selection was held at the leval of Deputy Excise Commissioners on 28.8.1997 in which the physical measurement of the candidates namely, height and chest (expanded and unexpanded) was also taken. The writ petitioners having been selected were issued appointment letters on 30.8.1997. It appears that the State Government received complainants that the persons who did not meet the prescribed qualifications regarding physical measurement had been selected and consequently a direction was issued to the Excise Commissioner to hold a fresh examination of all candidates who had been selected. The Excise Commissioner, U.P. accordingly passed an order on 6.1.1998 directing that all the selected candidates should appear at the Head Quarters at Allahabad on 20.1.1998 for examination of their physical measurements. The Chief Medical Officer, Allahabad, constituted a team of two doctors namely, Dr. Ajit Singh and Dr. Anil Kumar, who measured the height and chest of over 100 candidates who had been selected in the selection held at the Divisional level in August, 1997. According to their report, the writ petitioners did not meet the requirement regarding physical standards prescribed in the Rules. The Excise Commissioner, U.P. by the order dated 1.10.1999 directed the Deputy Excise Commissioner to take appropriate steps by issuing notice for termination of the services of the writ petitioners. The Deputy Excise Commissioner, (thereafter, issued a notice to the writ petitioner (Paran Hansh Singh) on 7.10.1999 to show cause why his services should not be terminated, as he did not meet the requirement of the Rules regarding physical standards. Separate notices were issued to all the writ petitioners mentioning their height and chest measurement (expanded and unexpanded). The writ petitioners submitted reply to the show cause notices and after considering the same their services were terminated by the order dated 6.11.1999 on the ground that they did not meet the requirement of Rule 13 of the Rules which governed their recruitment. The termination order was challenged by the respondents by filing writ petitions under Articles 226 of the Constitution and the learned Single Judge by his judgment and order dated 4.1.2000 quashed the order dated 6.11.1999. Feeling aggrieved the State of U.P., Excise Commissioner and Deputy Excise Commissioner have preferred this special appeal.

(3.) THE second proviso to Rule 13 shows that the minimum height for the post of Excise constable (other than those belonging to hills) is 167.6 cm. and the chest measurement should not be less than 81.3. cm. unexpended and 84.6 cm. after expansion. It appears that the standards were originally in inches and after enforcement of the metric system, it was converted into centimeters. It converted into inches, the minimum height comes to 5 feet 6 inches and the chest measurement comes to 32 -34 inches. The measurement of the respondents done by the team of doctors at the Head Quarters on 20.1.1998 was found as follows : -