» • IN THE HIGH COURT QF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P. (Sl N0. ^Sc) 3 /2008 PETITIONER ^ RESPONDENTS Tarun Kumar Deshmukh S/o Pardeshi Ram Deshmukh, aged about 26 years, R/o Village and Post Khopli, Tahsil Durg, District Durg C.G. VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary Home Department, D.K. S. Bhawan Raipur C.G. ^" 2. The Inspector Genreal of Police, Raipur, C.G. 3. The Superintendent of Police, Jagdalpur, Districtjagdalpur C.G. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUE OF AN APPROPRIATE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS/CERTIORARI ETC. OR DIRECTION/ORDER IN THE LIKE NATURE ETC. f HJGH COURT OF CHHATTJSGARH : BtLASPUR PETITJONER .RESPQNDENTS WRiT PETiTipN N0. 6593 OF Tarun Kymar Deshmukh versus of ChhaStisgarh & Othe.rs ^N Post for pix/nouncement ofthe order cn _//day oT February, 2010 Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ^v HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR PETmONER RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION N0. 6593 OF 2008 Tarun Kumar Deshmukh Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Rajesh Pandey, counsel for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State. ORDER (Delivered on this //^ay of February, 2010) By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent No.3 to consider his case for selection on the post of Constable- GD in General Category as per his qualification. The indisputable facts, in nutshell, as projected by the petitioner, are thatpursuant to the advertisement dated 11-2-2008 (Annexure - P/1), the petitioner made an application for selection and appointment on the post of Constable-GD. Sub-rule (5) of Rule 9 of the Chhattisgarh Police Executive Force, Constable (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2007 (for short "the Rules, 2007") provides for physical qualification of a candidate i.e. height 168 cm. or more, chest without expansion is 81 cm. and with expansion 86 cm. in case of General Category candidates. ^;^M^'^. ir '^. ^.' J j ^^ 'y^ ••^.^^^ The scheme of selection under sub-rule (6) of Rule 7 of the Rules, 2007 provides that a candidate after having found physically eligible would be introduced to physical test, thereafter on selection he would be introduced to written test. Selection list is required to be prepared thereafter. Shri Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that once the petitioner has cleared the minimum physical requirement thereafter he was sent for physical test and written test. After having been found eligible on the requisite physical condition and after having successfully passed the physical test as well as written test, appointment on the post of Constable-GD cannot be denied to the petitioner on the ground of lack of requisite physical condition. On the other hand, Shri Bhatia, learned Dy. Govt. Advoc"te appearing for the State, would submit that it is true that the petitioner has been allowed to partidpate in the physical test and thereafter in the written test, but the fact remains that the petitioner does not meet the requisite minimum physical condition. It has been found that the height of the petitioner was in accordance with the requirement i.e. 166+3 cm. Without expansion the chest of the petitioner was 81 cm. and with expansion it was 85cm., not 86 cm., as required. Thus, despite having passed the physical test as well as written test, the petitioner was not found eligible for appointment on the post of Constable-GD, forwant of requisite physical condition. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and the documents appended thereto. 8. There is no dispute that the height of the petitioner was as per the requirement i.e. 168 cm. The chest of the petitioner was 81 cm. without expansion, but with expansion it was only85 cm., as is evident from back side of Annexure - R/2 i.e. admit card. Thus, the petitioner did not have the basic requisite physical condition for consideration on physical test and selection. 9. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that once the petitioner has been cleared in requisite physical condition under the provisions of sub-rule (5) of Rule 9 of the Rules, 2007 and he was introduced to physical test where he was found successful and thereafter after being successful in physical test the petitioner was introduced to written test and in the written test the petitioner obtained more marks than other candidates who were appointed, the authorities are estopped from taking into consideration again the requisite physical condition, deserves to be rejected on the simple ground that the candidate has to meet the mandatory requirement of physical condition. It is an appointment in the police force wherein the basic physical condition is most important factor, which cannot be ignored on the ground that subsequently the petitioner has cleared the physical test as well as written test. The candidature of the petitioner was rightly rejected, as his physical condition was not in accordance with the provisions of the Rules, 2007 i.e. 81 cm. chest without expansion and 86 cm. with expansion. L-.'..- There should be a difference of 5 cm. without expansion and with expansion. The petitioner does not dispute the measurement of his chest with expansion, which was found 85cm. 10. As per sub-rule (5) of Rule 9 of the Rules, 2007 no relaxation with regard to requisite physical condition will be given by the selecting authority. There is a note to the effect in the provision that relaxation may be given only by the Director General of Police in special cases with regard to the requisite physical condition under clauses (a) and (b) of sub-rule (5) of Rule 9 of the Rules, 2007. There is no pleading or document showing that the petitioner has ever approached the Director General of Police for extending the benefit of relaxation with regard to requisite physical condition. 11. Having regard to the fact that the persons who have secured lesser marks in the physical test as well as in the written test have been selected, as is clear from the document dated 22-9-2008 (Annexure - P/6, which is an information received by the petitioner under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005) that a person having obtained 88 marks in the physical test and 33 marks in thewritten test in General category has been appointed, whereas the petitioner has obtained 91 marks in the physical test and 39 marks in the written test, but his candidature was rejected only on the ground that with expansion his chest was short of 1 cm. and the Director General of Police has power to relax the requisite physical condition 12. 13. under clauses (a) and (b) of sub-rule (5) of Rule 9 of the Rules, 2007, it would be just and expedient to direct the Director General of Police to consider the case of the petitioner for relaxation of the requirement of the requisite physical condition and pass appropriate order, in accordance with law. It is ordered accordingly. In the result, the writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. 14. There shall no order asto costs. ^jwri Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge