O R D E R

After qualifying in the written examination held in the recruitment process for the post of Sub Inspector of Police in the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, under the open category for the year 2019, the petitioner was subjected to physical measurement test, which included height measurement. As against the required height of 170 cms, the petitioner's height was measured at 169.5 cms and consequently, his candidature was rejected vide the impugned disqualification slip dated 01.10.2020. Challenging the rejection, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner's actual height is 170 cms. Earlier, when he had participated in the common recruitment for Grade-II Police Constables conducted in the year 2012, he had qualified himself in the physical measurement norms, including the height of 170 cms, but was disqualified in the physical efficiency test. Since the respondent had properly measured his height in the earlier selection process, it is obvious that they have committed an error in the present selection process. It is his further submission that in the original physical measurement conducted on 01.10.2020, his height was measured at 169.5 cms and on appeal to the Higher Authorities, the height was re-measured at 169.0 cms. In view of this discrepancy, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the physical test itself is unreliable and therefore, sought for a fresh physical measurement. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance on the Hon'ble Full Bench decision of this Court in A.Parthiban and others vs. Tamil Nadu Uniformed Service Recruitment Board and others in W.A.Nos.8 to 12, 14 to 16, 23 and 24 of 2020 etc., and submitted that the parameters held by the Full Bench was to relax an extent of 0.5 cm in the height measurement test by 'rounding-off', which has not been followed during the recruitment process. Learned counsel also placed reliance on the medical certificate issued by a Government Doctor, dated 05.10.2020, that certifies his height as 170 cms.

4. Per contra, the learned Additional Advocate General placed reliance on the Full Bench decision and stated that there was no specific direction by the Hon'ble Full Bench to 'round-off' the height measurement by 0.5 cms and that, the Hon'ble Division Benches of this Court, on various occasions. had declined to interfere with the questions of fact, which consideration was within the purview of the Authorities concerned.

5. I have given careful considerations to the submissions made by the respective counsels.

6. As rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate General, the Hon'ble Full Bench in A.Parthiban's case(cited supra) had addressed the principle of 'rounding-off' adopted by the respondent in the physical height measurement test and had suggested for amendment of the Tamil Nadu Police Special Rules, to enable 'rounding-off' the measurement by 0.5 cm, to eliminate discrepancies. There were no positive directions by the Hon'ble Full Bench for 'rounding-off' the height measurement by 0.5 cms for the present recruitment process in the present 2019 notification. As such, I am unable to agree with the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner in this regard. 7. For the sake of convenience, the relevant portion of the Hon'ble Full Bench judgment in A.Parthiban's case (cited supra) is extracted hereunder:

“41. Coming to the third question of the principle of rounding off adopted by the respondents, even though the amendments are in force since 2015 and are not under challenge before us, we otherwise do not find any such error in the implementation thereof keeping in view Clause 6(2) of the norms contained in the Compendium of Instructions extracted herein above. However, the same can be reconsidered in order to avoid any miscalculation or computation risks by making a provision of a minimum relaxation in the height requirement inc