Madras High Court
S.Boopalan vs The Tamil Nadu Uniform Service on 13 July, 2021
Author: Pushpa Sathyanarayana
Bench: Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Krishnan Ramasamy
W.A.No.700 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13.07.2021
CORAM
The Honourable Mrs.Justice PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
and
The Honourable Mr.Justice KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.A.No.700 of 2021
S.Boopalan ... Appellant
vs
1.The Tamil Nadu Uniform Service
Recruitment Board,
Old Commissioner of Police Office Campus,
Pantheon Road,
Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.
2.The Director General of Police,
Kamarajar Salai,
Chennai.
3.The Chairman,
Sub Committee & Deputy Inspector
General of Police,
Villupuram Range,
Villupuram. ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act against
the final order dated 26.11.2019, made in W.P. No.32301 of 2019.
****
For Appellant : Mr.Neethidurai
For Respondents : Mr.R.Neelagandan
State Government Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.1 of 8
W.A.No.700 of 2021
JUDGMENT
(delivered by Krishnan Ramasamy.J., ) This is an intra-Court appeal filed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No.32301 of 2019 dated 26.11.2019.
2.The learned Single Judge after hearing both the parties dismissed the writ petition stating that the appellant does not possess physical standards as mentioned in the notification dated 06.03.2019, for the post of Grade -II Police Constable, Grade – II Jail Warden and Fireman for the year 2019.
3.Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant/writ petitioner preferred the present appeal.
4.The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that, initially, when the height of the appellant was measured by the respondent, his height was recorded as 170.2 cms. When it was re-measured, as per the direction of the third respondent, it was recorded as 169.5 cms. There would be no possibility for reduction of the 0.7cms. Therefore, the appellant filed the writ petition to quash the impugned order dated https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No.2 of 8 W.A.No.700 of 2021 07.11.2019 and to direct the respondents to re-measure the height and allow him to participate in the selection process.
5.Per contra, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents would submit that, as per the notification, dated 06.03.2019, the height of the candidate applying to the post of Grade -II Police Constable, Grade – II Jail Warden and Fireman for the year 2019, should be 170 cms, whereas, in the present case, the height of the appellant was measured as 169.5 cms, As per the said notification, the appellant did not possess the requisite height, thus, the third respondent, vide the order impugned in the Writ Petition, disqualified the appellant/writ petitioner. It is his further submission that, if a person is measured as 169.6 cms and above in physical measurement on both the occasions, it would be rounded off as 170 cms, whereas, in the present case, the height of the appellant was measured only as 169.5 cms. Therefore, the question of rounding off 169.5 as 170 cms, does not arise and the appellant was rightly disqualified and there is no illegality in it.
6. In the present case, the measurement was done physically and since the appellant's height was 169.5 cms, he is not eligible for the post of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No.3 of 8 W.A.No.700 of 2021 Police Constable. Further, the entire selection process got over on 14.02.2020 and subsequently, appointment order was also issued and at present, no post has been reserved for recruiting the appellant herein. At this juncture, it is very difficult to give a chance to the appellant, even if the Court finds that there is a case for the appellant and hence, he prayed for the dismissal of the appeal.
7.We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Government Pleader for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.
8.The appellant was originally applied for the post of Grade -II Police Constable, Grade – II Jail Warden and Fireman for the year 2019. The appellant had passed in the written examination conducted on 25.08.2019, therefore, he was called for physical measurement test on 07.11.2019. At the time of measuring the height, first time the appellant's height was recorded as 170.2 cms and second time, it was recorded as 169.5 cms. 0.5 cm variation in the height measurement would happen in every case, if the measurement is taken even in the same day. Therefore, difference in the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No.4 of 8 W.A.No.700 of 2021 first and the second measurement is very negligible. Hence, we do not find any irregularity in the aspect of measuring the height of the appellant. The learned Single Judge has elaborately dealt with all these aspects and it would be apposite to extract the relevant portion of the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Paragraph Nos. 9 and 10, reads as follows:
“9. The issue involved in these Writ Petitions is the wrong measurement of height of the petitioners who have participated in the Physical Measurement Test for the post of Grade – II Police Constable, Grade – II Warder and Fireman. The respective heights of the petitioners are produced below in the tabular column for better understanding:
Sl.No Writ Petition Name of the Height
number petitioner measured in
Physical
Measurement
Test (in cms)
1. W.P.No.32301/2019 S.Boobalan 169.5
2. W.P.No.32352/2019 Bhuvaneshwari. 158
A
3. W.P.No.32353/2019 Shalini.R 155.4
4. W.P.No.32356/2019 Gandhimathi.B 155.5
5. W.P.No.32358/2019 Suganthi.P 157.9
6. W.P.No.32360/2019 Prasath.A 169
7. W.P.No.32496/2019 S.Vignesh 169.5
From the above details, it is crystal clear that the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No.5 of 8 W.A.No.700 of 2021 petitioners are not possessing the required physical standard as mentioned in the notification dated 06.03.2019 for the selection process for the post of Grade – II Police Constable, Grade – II Warder and Fireman for the year 2019. 10. Though the core allegation is based on the wrong measurement of the height, a perusal of the Judgment made by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1265 of 2017 would reveal that once the Expert Authority arrived at the Physical Measurement, it cannot be interfered by the Constitutional Court unless the petitioner is able to prove his/her part materially before the Court. In the present case, the petitioners have not participated in the earlier selection process and they were participated in this selection process for the first time. Therefore, the measurement made by the Authorities cannot be interfered by this Court without any material. It is also to be noted that, it is not for the Writ Court to go into the factual disputes as to whether the height of a candidate has correctly been recorded or not.”
9.A perusal of the above order would show that, since the appellant did not satisfy the required height of 170 cms, as per the notification dated 06.05.2019, he was dis-qualified. Further, the entire selection process was over on 14.02.2020 and all the selected candidates were also issued with the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No.6 of 8 W.A.No.700 of 2021 appointment order. At this juncture, we are of the view that, interfering the selection process will cause prejudice for the entire recruitment as admittedly there is no interim order reserving one post vacant for the appellant in the event of success in the appeal. As such, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Therefore, we concur with the finding of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the present writ appeal deserves for dismissal.
10.In the result, the writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.
[P.S.N., J.] [K.R., J.]
13.07.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
rst
To:
1.The Tamil Nadu Uniform Service
Recruitment Board,
Old Commissioner of Police Office Campus, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.
2.The Director General of Police, Kamarajar Salai, Chennai.
3.The Chairman, Sub Committee & Deputy Inspector General of Police, Villupuram Range, Villupuram.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No.7 of 8 W.A.No.700 of 2021 PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.
and KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
rst W.A.No.700 of 2021 13.07.2021 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No.8 of 8