Form No. J.(2)

Item No. DL/13 ARPAN - AR (CT)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction

(Appellate Side)

W.P.A. NO.22474 OF 2025

RAJESH KUMAR PANDIT

Vs.

THE UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

BEFORE: THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sabyasachi Bhattacharjee, Adv.

Mrs. Barnali Pal, Adv.

Mr. Suman Nandi, Adv.

For the U.O.I. : Mr. Indrajeet Dasgupta, Adv.

Mr. Tapan Bhanja, Adv.

Hearing concluded on : 25.11.2025 Judgment On : 25.11.2025

SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA, J.:

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

2. Petitioner participated in the selection process for being appointed as

Constable (GD) in Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs). A written test

was conducted where petitioner qualified but in Physical Standard Test (PST) height of the petitioner was measured less than 170 cm which prompted the petitioner to prefer appeal before the Appellate Authority questioning measurement of height. Appellate Authority measured the height of the petitioner and vide order dated 25^th August, 2025 disclosed the same as 169.5 cm.

3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner upon placing reliance on Clause 2(d) of the Guidelines for Recruitment Medical Examination in Central Armed Police Forces and Assam Rifles as revised in May, 2015, that if height of a candidate is measured in between 169.5 cm and

169.9 cm, same needs to be rounded off to the next higher centimeter.

4. Mr. Indrajeet Dasgupta, learned advocate representing the Union of India has opposed this writ petition on the ground that as per provision of Clause 2(d) of the Revised Guidelines benefit of relaxation of height needs to be granted at the stage while considering overall physical eligibility of the candidate taking note of weight of the candidate. According to the respondents, in this case, that stage has not yet reached.

5. It is also submitted on behalf of the respondents that since petitioner’s height in appeal was measured as 169.5 cm, at this stage, petitioner is not entitled to get benefit of Clause 2(d) of the Revised Guidelines of May, 2015.

6. Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking note of the provisions as contained in Clause 2(d) of the Revised Guidelines, it appears that it is specifically provided while measuring height fraction of centimeter less than 0.5 cm will be ignored and 0.5 cm and more will be rounded off to the next higher centimeter.

7. In the present case, it is true that in appeal height of the petitioner was measured as 169.5 cm which is less by 0.5 cm than requisite height, i.e., 170 cm but applying the provisions as contained in Clause 2(d) of the Revised Guidelines, petitioner is eligible to get benefit of relaxation and height of the petitioner which was found as 169.5 cm, is required to be rounded off to next higher centimeter, that is, 170 cm. It is specifically stipulated in Clause 2(d) that at the time of measurement relaxation relating to height as contemplated therein needs to be extended in an appropriate case.

8. In aforesaid conspectus, concerned respondent authorities are directed to treat height of the petitioner as 170 cm by rounding it off as contemplated under Clause 2(d) of the Revised Guidelines and if petitioner is found otherwise eligible, steps shall be taken for appointment of the petitioner in the post of Constable (GD) in CAPFs.

9. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed by the concerned respondent authorities by twelve (12) weeks from the date of communication of this order.

10. With the aforesaid directions writ petition stands disposed of.

11. Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon usual undertakings.

(SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA, J.)