BINOD KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVT. OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present petitioner had applied for the post of Constable in pursuance of a public advertisement which is at Annexure-1 to the memo of the petition, thereafter, the petitioner has cleared all the examinations including the physical test, taken by the respondents and the petitioner has obtained 16 marks and the candidates, who have obtained 18 marks, have been selected for the post of Constable. Petitioner's height is 182 cms. whereas the height of the petitioner was recorded as 177 cms. by the respondents. The marks to be allotted for the correct height of the petitioner if given properly as per Annexure-B to the counter affidavit, filed by respondent no. 4, the petitioner would have obtained 14 marks for height. Thus, the total marks will be 19 and the petitioner would have selected by the respondents. There is an error in the measurement of the height of the present petitioner, which is apparent. The petitioner is having more than six feet height and, therefore, let the matter may be remanded to the concerned respondent authorities for measurement of height and for giving proper marks as per Annexure-B to the counter affidavit, filed by respondent no. 24 so that the case of the present petitioner may be considered by the respondent authorities.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the respondents, who has vehemently submitted that the present petitioner's height is 177 cms. which has been recorded by the respondents and as per Annexure-A to the counter affidavit, filed by respondent no. 4, his height is correctly recorded, therefore, the marks given by the respondents for the corresponding height of the present petitioner is also true and correct and, therefore, the present petition deserves to be dismissed. Moreover, there is provision for preferring an appeal if there is any error in the measurement of the height as per Clause 9 of the Policy decision, which is at Annexure-B to the counter affidavit, filed by respondent no. 4 and, therefore also, the present writ petition may not be allowed by this Court.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that:-