IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4498 of 2002 1. SANDEEP KUMAR S/O Sri Dinanath Sharma, R/O-Village-Barki Kopa, P.S-Naubatpur, Distt-Patna. 2. Rajesh Kumar S/O Satya Narayan Mishra, R/O-Village-Janipur, P.S- Nanpur, Distt- Sitamarhi…………petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar Patna. 2. The D.G-cum-I.G of Police, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Inspector General of Bihar Military Police, Bihar, Patna. 4. The D.I.G, B.M.P.Central Range. 5. The Commandant, B.M.P.18,Gaya. 6. The Commandant, B.M.P.14,Patna. 7. The Commandant, B.M.P.5,Patna…………….Respondents. ----------- For petitioners:-Mr.Ebrahim Kabir, Adv For Respondents:-SC-6 ------ 4/ 3-Dec-2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Petitioners have preferred this writ petition for directing the respondents to appoint them on the post of Constables in Bihar Military Police on the ground that in the first measurement petitioners were shown to be 180 Centimetres in height and therefore meeting the requirement for recruitment but on re-measurement they were found to be short in height by 2 Centimetres and 1.5 Centimetres respectively. On behalf of petitioners it has been - 2 - submitted that petitioners have been wrongly measured on the second occasion and further submission is that in order to set the controversy at rest this Court may direct for fresh measurement of the height of the petitioners. The transaction is of the year 1998. The appointments are concluded and complete. Even subsequent recruitment process has taken place. A judgment of this Court in respect of same very recruitment took the view that employer is at liberty to order for re-measurement or re- verification of basic requirements and there is nothing wrong in getting the height re-checked because height was the main criteria for selection. Considering that the respondents had the authority and competence to re-measure the height of the petitioners who have not been found to meet the required criteria, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter either on merit or in the light of the fact that subsequent transactions of recruitment have already been taken place. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. perwez (Shiva Kirti Singh,J.)