IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 6414/2010 Reserved on: 4.7.2011 Decided on:8.7.2011 _____________________________________________ Vinod Kumar. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents. ______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes For the petitioner : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Vikas Rathore, Dy. A.G. with Mr. R.P. Singh, Asstt. A.G. for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. L.N. Sharma, Advocate for respondents 4 to 8. ___________________________________________________ Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Respondent-State issued an advertisement vide Annexure P-5 whereby applications were invited for filling up 1309 posts of constables in Himachal Pradesh. The last date of receipt of applications was 28.2.2010. Petitioner belongs to scheduled caste category. Respondent-State had reserved 25 posts for scheduled caste category candidates. Petitioner submitted an 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 application, pursuant to which he was called to appear for the ground test and written test. Petitioner qualified the ground test and written test and thereafter, he was called for interview on 30.9.2010. Petitioner has been given 2 marks for height, 19.50 marks for ground test, 43 marks for written test and 4 marks in interview and thus he has secured 68.50 marks. Name of the petitioner was not recommended for appointment to the post of constable on the basis of merit drawn by the respondent- State. 2. Mr. Ramakant Sharma has strenuously argued that his client was entitled to get 3 marks instead of 2 marks for height since the height of the petitioner was more than 5'.9". According to him, the petitioner has obtained certificate from I.G.M.C. Shimla whereby his height has been measured as 177 cms. instead of 5'.8¾" as given by the Medical Officer. He then argued that if one mark is added to the tally of the petitioner, he will rank higher in merit vis-à-vis those candidates, who have already been selected and appointed as constables. 3. Mr. Vikas Rathore, learned Deputy Advocate General and Mr. L.N. Sharma appearing on behalf of the respondents have vehemently argued that since the height of the petitioner was 5'.8¾" he has rightly been awarded 2 makrs. 3 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully. 5. The height of the petitioner as per Annexure R-1 has been measured as 5'.8¾" by the Medical Officer. Petitioner has placed on record medical certificate during the course of hearing issued by the I.G.M.C. Shimla whereby the height of the petitioner has been measured as 177 cms. The Court had occasion to see the petitioner in person in order to verify the height. The same was also got verified by the Medical Officer, High Court of H.P. Dispensary. The height given by the Medical Officer, High Court of H.P. Dispensary is also 177 cms. The formula on the basis of which the marks have to be given to the candidates for height is carved out in para 6 of the reply filed by respondent-State. Since the height of the petitioner has been certified by the I.G.M.C. Shimla as 177 cms, he was entitled to get 3 marks instead of 2 marks. The Medical Officer was also directed to remain present in the Court. She stated that there could be difference in the measuring instrument and the petitioner could also gain height within one year. However, she has admitted that it can only happen in rarest of the rare cases where the height could increase after the age of 22 years. Since the height of the petitioner now has been certified by the I.G.M.C. Shimla, 4 which stand verified from the Medical Officer, High Court of H.P. Dispensary, the petitioner was entitled to one more mark for height and his tally will increase to 69.50. 6. Mr. Vikas Rathore has also placed on record the merit list of candidates, according to which, few candidates, namely, Krishan Mohan has secured 69.17 marks, Sandeep Kumar has secured 69.17 marks, Santosh Kumar has secured 69.00 marks, Piare Lal has secured 69.00 marks, Hardev Singh has secured 68.83 marks, Ajeet Singh has secured 68.67 marks, Trilok Chand has secured 68.67 marks and Om Parkash has secured 68.50 marks. 7. In view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, the petitioner is entitled to one more mark since his height is 5'.9" but less than 5'.10". 8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Respondent-State is directed to redraw the merit list by giving one more mark to the petitioner and to issue appointment letter to him in accordance with the redrawn merit list within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. No costs. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. 8.7. 2011*awasthi*