Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

D. Narendhiran vs The Chairman

Madras High Court|12 September, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The order of disqualification, issued by the respondent, in proceedings dated 04.08.2017, is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner submits that the writ petitioner has submitted his application, pursuant to the recruitment notification, issued for the post of Grade-II Police Constables. The writ petitioner had successfully passed in the written examination and received a call letter, for participating in the Physical Measurement Test, Endurance Test and Physical Efficiency Test. The writ petitioner had participated in the test and succeeded in Physical measurement Test. Subsequently, in the event of long jump, on the particular day, when the events were conducted, there was heavy rain in Vellore district and the writ petitioner was unable to participate and put his efforts due to heavy rain and hence, he was unable to succeed in the event. Under these circumstances, the Physical Eligibility Test is sought to be conducted once again and another opportunity is sought to be provided to the writ petitioner.
3. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents contended that most of the candidates got selected in the event even when there was rain. The writ petitioner cannot seek any exception that the rain has caused inconvenience to perform the event in a successful way. Such a ground cannot be accepted as it may not be possible for the authorities to conduct the event once again.
4. Further, when equal opportunities were provided to the candidates and the writ petitioner had participated in the event and after having received the orders of disqualification, he cannot now take a stand that he could not perform well due to heavy rain.
5. The rope climbing, high jump, long jump, short put, 100 meters run and 400 meters run are all competitive events and it is for the recruiting agency, to adopt fair and transparent procedures to conduct the process of selection. Hence, this court cannot go into said procedure in this regard. Secondly, the reasonableness and the transparency are followed in the process of selection.
6. Any writ petition challenging the process of selection can be entertained only in the event of certain malpractices, corruptive activities or if the selection is conducted, contrary to the statutory rules, but not otherwise. In the absence of any of such serious allegation in the process of selection, this Court cannot issue any direction to the recruiting authorities to conduct the physical eligibility test repeatedly.
7. Hence, no further consideration is required in this regard and accordingly the writ petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
12.09.2017 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No rpl To
1.The Chairman, Sub Committee, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.
2.The Member, Sub Committee, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board Chennai - 600 008.
3.The Superintendent of Police Vellore District Vellore.
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J rpl W.P.No.23943 of 2017 12.09.2017
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

D. Narendhiran vs The Chairman

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
12 September, 2017