KULDEEP KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to the respondents to decide her representation dtd. 4/9/2025.

(2.) The petitioner, pursuant to Advertisement No.1/2016, applied for the post of Constable. The respondent declared result which came to be challenged in CWP No.22985 of 2016 and connected petitions. The writ petitions came to be disposed of vide order dtd. 5/7/2021. Few candidates filed CWP No.25491 of 2023 which was disposed of on 30/4/2024 with a direction to fill up 195 posts lying vacant. The petitioner made representation dtd. 4/9/2025 seeking appointment.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that actual height of petitioner is 5'7" whereas respondents wrongly measured 5' 6". Apart from other questions, question of height was pending before this Court in a bunch of writ petitions including CWP No. 22985 of 2016. The matter was finally adjudicated on 5/7/2021 and State was directed to re-measure height of petitioners. The respondent did not re-measure height of the petitioner. She was not disclosed marks of her height, thus, could not prefer writ petition. A Division Bench of this Court in Ved Pal Mor vs. State of Haryana, 1999(1) SCT 76 has held that rule of delay does not govern the administrative action. Whenever an authority finds that an error has been committed, it has undoubted jurisdiction and discretion to rectify the mistake.