Hon’ble V.K. Shukla, J.—In both these writ petitions, petitioners are questioning the validity of decision dated 8.8.2007 taken by Superintendent of Police, Fatehpur, dispensing with the services of petitioners on the ground that they did not fulfill the standard of medical fitness.

2. Brief facts, giving rise to instant writ petition, are that an advertisement was published on 6.2.2005. Pursuant to the same petitioners applied for consideration of their candidature and their recruitment was held at Police Lines, Fatehgarh. Thereafter physical and written examinations were held and interview took place, and they were finally selected. Medical examination was also conducted at Police Lines Fatehgarh. Petitioners were found medically fit and were offered appointment. Petitioners have contended that they joined their services and had been performing and discharging their duties. Director General of Police on 29.6.2007 has passed order for review of entire appointments made during the year 2004-2006 in P.A.C. and Civil Police. Pursuant to this directive, Chief Medical Officer constituted Medical Board and both the petitioners have been found colour blind, and based on the said medical unfitness services of petitioners have been dispensed with. At this juncture present writ petitions have been filed.

3. With the consent of the parties, present writ petitions are being heard and decided finally.

4. Sri Vijay Gautam, Advocate, appearing for petitioners, contended with vehemence that petitioners were validly selected, they had cleared all medical examinations and the alleged disqualifications, on the basis of which petitioners are non-suited, same at no point of time were made known to petitioners and in the present Medical examination, which has been conducted, standard of evaluation has not been specified, as such entire exercise is arbitrary, unreasonable and against the rules of fair play, and coupled with this no notice or opportunity had been provided for, and by placing reliance on totally inapplicable provision, impugned order in question has been passed.

5. Sri Piyush Shukla, learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, contended that an incumbent who is to be enrolled in the police force has to be physically and medically fit, and once it has been found that petitioners are medically unfit, they cannot be retained as member of the force, and rightfully, their services have been disengaged.

6. To start with the case in hand, relevant provisions of U.P. Police Regulations, i.e. Regulations 411, 412, 415 and 541 are to be looked into and they being quoted below :

"411. No recruit shall be enlisted whose chest measurements is less than 34 inches expanded with a minimum expansion of 2 inches and whose height is less than 5 feet 9 inches. To this rule there are the following exceptions :

(a) A recruit between 18 and 20 years of age who shows signs of growing, may be enlisted if his height is not less than 5 feet 5 inches and his expanded chest is not less than 32 inches with a minimum expansion of 2 inches, provided that the Civil Surgeon certified that he is under 20 years of age and that he is likely to attain standard measurements.

(b) In the case of hillmen, the height may be not less than 5 feet 4 inches.

(c) In the case of Tribal candidates, the chest measurement must not be less than 34" expanded with a minimum expansion of 2" and the height must not be less than 5 3".

Note.—(i) As far as possible tall and well built men should be enlisted in the Police as constable as physical appearance and personality are important factors for efficient discharge of their duties.

(ii) Persons with bow legs, irrespective of the degree of bow present shall not be recruited. Slight curvature of legs is, however, to be treated as normal and should not lead to unnecessary rejections.

412. Before a candidate for recruitment is sent to the Civil Surgeon for medical examination his height and chest measurements must be accurately taken b