IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Anil Kshetarpal, J.
Rashpal Singh & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Punjab & Anr. – Respondents
Civil Writ Petition No. 1058 of 2022 and Civil Writ Petition No. 534 of 2022
Decided On : 23-02-2022
Mandamus - Recruitment Dispute - CWP-1058/2022, CWP-534/2022 - CWP-23875-2016, Sonu Singh Vs. State of Haryana - The court upheld the selection criteria and the decision to dispense with interviews for the post of Constable. It ordered re-measurement of height for aggrieved petitioners and issuance of appointment letters to selected candidates. It also mandated the State to ensure the guidelines in Sonu Singh's case are made mandatory in all future recruitments in Punjab Police and other departments where height is a selection criterion.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the official respondents to remeasure his physical height and allow him to participate in the interview for the post of Male Constable.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the petitioner failed to explain the delay of more than five years in filing the writ petition and did not deserve indulgence.
Issues: Delay in filing the writ petition, interference by the High Court in recruitment matters.
Ratio Decidendi: The petitioner's delay in seeking redress and failure to explain the delay led the Court to conclude that he did not deserve relief.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of in favor of the State, finding no merit in the petitioner's claim.
JUDGMENT
Anil Kshetarpal, J. (Oral) - This order shall dispose of Civil Writ Petition No.1058 of 2022 and Civil Writ Petition No.534 of 2022. The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the official respondents to remeasure the petitioner's physical height and, thereafter, allow him to participate in the interview and offer him a letter of appointment. The petitioner applied for the post of Male Constable in the District Police Cadre & Armed Police Cadre, pursuant to the recruitment notice dated 31.05.2016. The present writ petition has been filed on 17.01.2022.
2. The learned counsel representing the petitioner contends that the various writ petitions were filed in the High Court and vide an interim order dated 25.04.2018, the Court passed an order. The operative part of the order is extracted as under:-
'Vide order dated 23.03.2018, this Court directed the State for carrying out re-measurement on all the aggrieved petitioners. In pursuance of the order, a schedule was put on the official website and remeasurement upon 36 number of candidates indicated in the chart supplied during the course of hearing, which is taken on record as Mark 'A', were carried out. On completion of the exercise, out of 36 candidates, there is a variance of height with regard to 09 candidates which prima facie indicates that the team of officials deputed by the State regarding measurement either was not qualified or vigilant and thus due diligence was not observed. This high percentage of variance indicates gross negligence on the part of the recruiting agency which has put a large number of petitioner/candidates at a disadvantageous position.
In this view of the matter, the Court feels that complete justice has not been done to the petitioners/candidates. In view of the above, it is ordered that re-measurement of all the candidates including the selected ones be carried out in the light of guidelines issued by this Court in CWP-23875-2016 decided on 21.11.2016 in case of Sonu Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others. The State will again issue a notification to all the aggrieved candidates irrespective whether they have approached this Court or any other authority or not. The necessary exercise of re-measurement be carried out under the supervision of a senior IPS officer not below the rank of Inspector General of Police. The videography of re-measurement be also carried out.
Post again on 13.07.2018.
Photocopy of this order be placed on the connected file(s)'.
3. The learned counsel representing the petitioner further contends that the State of Punjab filed a review application, wherein it was stated that all the candidates and all those, who are aggrieved, can present themselves before the Committee headed by an IGP rank IPS Officer and get their height re-measured. The learned counsel submits that in the Letters Patent Appeal, the aforesaid interim order, passed by the learned Single Bench, was kept in abeyance while directing the learned Single Bench to decide the writ petition. He submits that on 05.07.221, the writ petition has been decided with the following observations:-
'39. To sum up in the end, hereinbelow are the succinct conclusions drawn and directions of the Court in the instant judgment:-
i) . The criteria of selection as per the original advertisement read with the standing order, is upheld and the petitioners' challenge thereto is rejected. Dispensing with the interviews for the post of Constable being Group-C which is in tune with the guidelines issued by the Government of India and the policy decision of the State Government dispensing with the interview is also upheld.
ii) . The grievance of the petitioners qua measurement of height would be mitigated by the State by carrying out one time re-measurement of their height in terms of judgment rendered by this Court in Sonu Singh's case, ibid. It is so ordered accordingly.
iii) All the petitioners be notified of the date, time and venue for remeasurement of h
Failure to explain delay in seeking redress can lead to the denial of relief in recruitment disputes.
A candidate who participates in a selection process wherein the eligibility criteria as well as the criteria for selection are disclosed beforehand cannot, upon being unsuccessful, turn around and co....
Candidates are bound by the terms of the advertisement and the standing order, and they cannot challenge the selection process after participating in it. The competent authorities have the discretion....
Candidates are bound by the terms of the advertisement and the standing order, and cannot challenge the selection process after participating in it.
Judicial discipline necessitates adherence to precedent, rendering prior favorable decisions per incuriam; the proper remedy for height disputes in recruitment lies in civil suits rather than writ pe....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.