IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 6639 of 2010. Decided on: 19th November, 2010. Keshav Nandan. ….Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & ors. …..Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. A.K. Rattan, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, DAG, for respondents No.1 to 3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayers: “(i) That the respondents be directed to measure the height of the petitioner and produce a certificate before this Hon’ble Court with respect to the height of the petitioner. (ii) That the height of the petitioner as declared by the Senior Medical Officer Incharge, Regional Hospital, Chamba, H.P. as 176.5 cm be taken into consideration as such and the respondent Recruitment Board be directed to award three marks to the petitioner. (iii) That the respondents be directed to produce the equipment of height measurement before this Hon’ble Court and height of the petitioner be measured in this Hon’ble Court in the interest of justice and fair play and if the same is found in accordance with Annexure P-6, respondents be directed to award three marks to the petitioner. (iv) That the respondents be directed to re-draw the selection merit list by granting three marks to the petitioner 2 and declare the petitioner as selected candidate and offer him appointment letter in accordance with law.” 2. It is submitted that on an earlier occasion before the Home Guard test, his measurement was recorded as 5.9”. Still further it is submitted that the Medical Certificate also shows that his height is 5.9”. However, when the measurement was taken at the time of recruitment, somehow according to the petitioner, the measurement was wrongly recorded as 5.8.1”. According to the petitioner if the re-measurement is properly taken, his height would be properly and correctly recorded. 3. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides and having gone through the record and proceedings, we are of the view that the matter requires considered by the first respondent. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of as follows: 4. In the event of the petitioner filing an appropriate representation before the first respondent with supporting material within a period of one week from today, the matter will be duly considered by the first respondent and appropriate action in accordance with law and justice will be taken thereon within another one month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment by the petitioner. 5. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. 19th November, 2010. (Justice V.K. Sharma), (tr) Judge. 3 4