Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5222 of 2021 Petitioner :- Israil Masih Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Petitioner's height was found to be 168 cm. at the stage of physical standard test, which met the requirement of physical parameters as per the rules and the advertisement. However, petitioner's height has been found short at the stage of medical examination.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that as per the Uttar Pradesh Police Constable and Head Constable Service Rules, 2015 the determination of height at the stage of physical standard test attaches finality and a contrary view cannot be taken by the team of doctors, since under the rules the measurement of height is by a team of experts with the assistance of requisite machines. It is also stated that petitioner's height was measured by the digital scale, whereas no facility was available at the time of medical examination.
Contention advanced by petitioner had been accepted by this Court in the case of Bhanu Pratap Rajput Vs. State of U.P. and others, in Writ Petition No.14195 of 2018, decided on 5.9.2018. The Division Bench of this Court has, however, reversed the judgment of learned Single Judge in the case of State of U.P. and others Vs. Bhanu Pratap Rajput, reported in 2021 (2) ADJ 451, by observing as under in para 16:-
"16. The medical examination by the Medical Board consisting of medical experts under Rule 15(g) cannot be said to be inferior to the physical standard test conducted by a team of non-experts. Therefore, we find that the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment that the assessment of physical standard by the committee constituted under Appendix-2 to the Rules, 2015 is liable to be preferred over the determination made by the Medical Board in terms of the Appendix-3, is not sustainable. Opinion of a committee of non-experts under Rule 15(d) for physical test of a candidate cannot override the opinion of the team of experts, i.e. Medical Board under Rule 15(g) of the Rules."
In view of the authoritative pronouncement of law on the subject by the Division Bench, no relief can be granted to petitioner. The observation of Division Bench in paragraph 21 is specific that re-measurement by Medical Board directed in that case was not to be treated as a precedent.
Learned counsel for the petitioner also places reliance upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court passed in Special Appeal (Defective) No.679 of 2020 to submit that re- measurement can be directed. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of U.P. and others Vs. Bhanu Pratap Rajput (supra) had taken note of the order passed in Special Appeal (Defective) No.679 of 2020 and had thereafter observed that direction for re-measurement of height by the Medical Board was in the peculiar facts of that case and cannot be treated as a precedent. In view of what has been observed in paragraph 21 in the case of State of U.P. and others Vs. Bhanu Pratap Rajput (supra) the petitioner's prayer for re-measurement of his height cannot be accepted.
Writ petition, accordingly, is dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.7.2021 Anil