Bharti Kumari Chauhan And Ors vs The State Of Bihar And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 4106 Patna

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

                 Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18695 of 2018

     ======================================================

1. Bharti Kumari Chauhan Daughter of Nagendra Prasad, Resident of Village/Mohallah- Konhawa, P.O. Pasrama, P.S. Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj (Bihar).

2. Pooja Kumari Daughter of Parma Ray Resident of Village/ Mohallah-

Narayanpur, P.O. Rahampur, P.S. Garkha, District- Saran, Bihar.

3. Yshoda Kumari Wife of Brajesh Kumar Resident of Village/ Mohallah-

Thebhay, P.O. Kolwara, P.S. Parbatta, District- Khagaria, Pin Code- 851216 (Bihar).

4. Pinkal Kumari Daughter of Niranjan Prasad Resident of Village/Mohalla-

Chhoti Tengraila, P.O. Amarpura, P.S. Naubatpur, District- Patna, Bihar.

5. Arti Kumari Daughter of Ram Baran Singh Resident of Village/Mohalla-

Adhaura, P.O. Adhaura, P.S. Adhaura, District- Kaimur (Bihar).

6. Khushboo Nisha Daughter of Md. Nasir Ansari Resident of Village/ Mohallah- Kursela Basti, P.O.- Ayodhyaganj Bazar, P.S. Kursela, District- Katihar, Pin Code- 854101 (Bihar).

7. Roni Verma Daughter of Vijay Kumar Verma Resident of Village/Mohalla- Abbu Mahammadpur, P.O.- Bakhtiyarpur, P.S. Bakhtiyarpur, District- Patna, Pin Code- 803212 (Bihar).

8. Sharda Kumari Daughter of Rajeshwar Singh Resident of Village/Mohalla- Dilshadpur, P.O. Huleshara, P.S. Bhagwapur Hat, District- Siwan, Pin Code- 841408 ( Bihar).

... ... Petitioners Versus

1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Home (Police) Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. Principal Secretary, Home (Police) Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. Director General of Police, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.

4. Central Selection Board (Constable Appointment), Sri Tara Complex, I.A.S. Colony, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Patna- 801503 (Bihar) through its Chairman.

5. Chairman, Central Selection Board (Constable Appointment), Sri Sai Tara Complex, I.A.S. Colony, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Patna- 801503 (Bihar).

6. Superintendent of Police, Rohtas.

... ... Respondents Patna High Court CWJC No.18695 of 2018 dt.16-08-2021

Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Raju Giri, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sanjay Pandey, AC to SC-8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 16-08-2021

I.A. No. 01 of 2021

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

counsel for the respondents through video conference.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

order dated 25.07.2018 has been brought on record by the

respondents by way of Annexure-E to the counter affidavit and was

not available to the petitioners prior thereto.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents has not raised

any serious objection to the prayer of the petitioners for

amendment of the writ petition.

4. For the reasons stated in the interlocutory application,

the prayer for amendment of the writ petition is allowed and the

I.A. shall be treated as part of the writ petition.

CWJC NO. 18695 of 2018

5. At the outset and after some arguments, learned

counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the writ

petition on behalf of petitioner no. 1.

Patna High Court CWJC No.18695 of 2018 dt.16-08-2021

6. Permission is accorded. The writ petition insofar as

petitioner no. 1 is concerned, stands dismissed as withdrawn.

7. The following reliefs as formulated by the petitioner

nos. 2 to 8 have been claimed in the writ petition -

"I. To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction in the

nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to

allow the petitioners to join as Constable in Bihar Police

on their selection made pursuant to the Advertisement

No. 01 of 2017 issued by the Central Selection Board

(Constable Appointment) on 29.07.2017.

II. To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction in the

nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to re-

measure the heights of the petitioners if at all required

by electronic device in the manner it was done at the

time of selection.

III. Any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is

found to be entitled in the facts and circumstances of the

case."

8. The short facts of the case according to the petitioner

nos. 2 to 8 are that pursuant to an Advertisement No. 01 of 2017

issued by the Central Selection Board (Constable Appointment) on

29.07.2017, they applied for appointment as constables in Bihar

Police, Bihar Military Police etc. and were issued admit cards. One

of the conditions in the advertisement required women candidates Patna High Court CWJC No.18695 of 2018 dt.16-08-2021

to be of minimum height of 155 cm. Upon participation in the

selection process, they were declared successful and found place in

the merit list issued in June, 2018. When these petitioners went to

submit their joining in August, 2018, their height was re-measured

and they were denied joining on the pretext that their height was

short of the minimum requisite.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner nos. 2 to 8 submits

that the petitioners have wrongly been denied their joining and the

re-measurement is not reliable. He draws support from the fact

that pursuant to a similar subsequent advertisement issued in the

year 2019 which also required the minimum height of women

candidates to be 155 cm, the petitioner no. 1 who had similarly

been denied her joining under the 2017 advertisement on the same

ground, was found to fulfill the criteria of minimum height of 155

cm. and was appointed as such. It is therefore submitted that the

said agency has erroneously made different measurements at

different points of time.

10. Learned counsel for the respondents appears and has

been heard. It is stated that after the initial measurement, the

height of the petitioners was measured for the second time during

joining at Rohtas District, when their height was found to be below

the minimum requisite. On the direction of the Central Selection

Board (Constable Appointment), fresh measurement was done, the

third time, and yet again it was found that the petitioners were Patna High Court CWJC No.18695 of 2018 dt.16-08-2021

below the minimum height. It is therefore submitted that on two

successive occasions when measurement was taken, the petitioners

did not qualify and as such they have rightly been denied

appointment. It is submitted that as far as the petitioner no. 1 is

concerned, it may not be a case of erroneous measurement; rather

she may have grown in height considering the time which had

elapsed between the two selection processes, the first in the year

2017 and the second in the year 2019.

11. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioners submits

that even between the second and third measurements there is

difference in height measurements of several other candidates.

Some of them had been found to be below the minimum height

requirement in the second measurement whereas they have been

shown as 155 cm. in height in the third measurement, such as the

candidates at serial nos. 5, 6, 7, 9, 11 and 13 (Annexure-D).

12. Having heard the parties and on a consideration of

the materials on record, this Court is of the view that the ends of

justice will be met by granting liberty to the petitioner nos. 2 to 8 to

file a representation before the Central Selection Board (Constable

Appointment) (respondent no. 4) for redressal of their grievances.

If any such representation is filed within a period of three weeks

from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of on its own

merits in accordance with law and after grant of an opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner nos. 2 to 8, expeditiously and in any event Patna High Court CWJC No.18695 of 2018 dt.16-08-2021

preferably within a further period of twelve weeks thereafter. To

facilitate disposal, the petitioners shall furnish their mobile

numbers and e-mail IDs to the respondent no. 4 within a week from

today.

13. The writ petition stands disposed of.

14. It is made clear that in view of the ongoing Covid-19

pandemic, any correspondence between the parties may be made

through e-mail and the petitioner nos. 2 to 8 shall be at liberty to

request for hearing through video conference.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//-

AFR/NAFR              NAFR
CAV DATE              N.A.
Uploading Date        17.08.2021
Transmission Date     N.A.