Form No. J(2)

Item No. DL / 42 RKD – A.R.(CT)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction (Appellate Side)

W.P.A. NO 28503 OF 2025 Dipankar Barman -Vs-

Union of India & Ors.

BEFORE: THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA For the Petitioner : Mr. Debasish Kundu For the union of India : Mr. Jasojeet Mukherjee Heard concluded on : 16.12.2025 Judgment On : 16.12.2025 SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA, J.:

1. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.

2. Matter is heard in presence of the learned advocates representing the petitioner and Union of India.

3. Petitioner participated in the selection process for being appointed in the post of Constable (GD) under Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs).

4. Petitioner qualified in computer based written examination, Physical Standard Test and Physical Efficiency Test. Subsequently, petitioner participated in Detailed Medical Examination (DME) and Review Medical Examination as the petitioner was found overweight in DME. In review medical examination petitioner was also found overweight.

5. On perusal of review medical report dated 26^th November, 2025, it appears that weight of the petitioner was measured 79 kg. Height of the petitioner is 177.7 cm as it appears from a document at page 18 of the writ petition.

6. It is submitted by the learned advocate representing the petitioner that present age of the petitioner is 26 years. Therefore, in order to find out whether petitioner is overweight or not Male Average Body Weights in Kilograms For Different Age Groups And Heights as it is disclosed by a chart appended to Revised Guidelines of May 2015 needs to be considered.

7. As height of the petitioner is 177.7 cm it is required to consider height of the petitioner 178 cm based on which weight of the petitioner has to be ascertained considering petitioner’s age i.e. 26 years. As per the chart weight of the petitioner considering his age and height should be in between 60 kg – 73 kg whereas it is found in Review Medical Examination that weight of the petitioner is 79 kg which is 6 kg in excess than permissible limit.

8. In the event relaxation in weight is extended as contemplated under Clause 2(d) of the Revised Guidelines of May, 2015 in that event by decreasing petitioner’s weight it needs to be assessed (79 kg – 5 kg)

74 kg.

9. As weight of the petitioner was found in Review Medical Examination on 26^th November, 2025, 79 kg even after granting benefit of relaxation of 5 kg petitioner’s weight does not come within the zone of permissible limit i.e. 60 kg – 73 kg.

10. Hence, this Court does not find anomaly in the review medical report dated 26th November, 2025. Accordingly, no relief can be granted to the petitioner.

11. The writ petition stands dismissed. 12. There shall be no order as to costs.

13. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned Advocates for the parties on the usual undertakings.

(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)