Krishan Murari Meena Vs Union of India & Ors.

“A. Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ to Respondents, order or direction, setting aside the disqualification of the Petitioner from Physical Standards Test (PST)/ Physical Efficiency Test (PET) in for the recruitment process of Central Armed Police Forces (Assistant Commandant) Examination-2025;

¶14

B. Issue directions to the Respondents allowing the petitioner to

¶15

W.P.(C) 2638/2026

¶16

Page 1 of 5

¶17

Signature Not Verified

¶18

Digitally Signed By:HEMANT PRATAP SINGH Signing Date:28.02.2026 12:24:03

¶19

appear in further rounds of selection process; C. Pass any such other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶20

In effect, the challenge in this petition by the petitioner is to the rejection of his candidature in the Physical Standard Test (PST) in the recruitment process of Central Armed Police Forces (Assistant Commandant) Examination-2025 on the ground that his height is 164.7 cm and not 165 cm, the required height.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 18334/2025 in Priyanshu Raj v. Union of India & Ors. at Annexure P-7 (at running page no. 73) wherein this Court had considered an identical issue and by referring to the General Instructions for Recruitment Board in paragraph 10 of the said order, granted the relief to the petitioner therein. The paragraph 10 is reproduced as under: -

¶22

“10. Petitioner has relied upon Clause 2(d) of the General instructions for Recruitment Board issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs on 20.05.2015 to contend that the said Guideline permits rounding off the height to the next higher centimetre and therefore the petitioner’s height which is 164.6 cm ought to be rounded off to 165 cm at the stage of PST. The said Guideline as relevant is extracted hereinbelow:

¶23

‘“2. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR RECRUITMENT BOARD:

¶24

d) Measurement of physical standards viz. height, weight, and chest is the responsibility of the PST Board (PST Board) for all categories of candidates i.e GOs, SOs and Ors. Medical Officers will not be part of PST board both for Male & Female candidates. Since presence of a female is required at the time of recording of physical standard (PST), a female non-medical staff may be associated with PST board. Recruiting medical officer need not record to physical measurements. Recruiting medical officer will mention physical standard in the medical examination form as recorded by the PST

¶25

W.P.(C) 2638/2026

¶26

Page 2 of 5

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed By:HEMANT PRATAP SINGH Signing Date:28.02.2026 12:24:03

¶29

board. In borderline cases of overweight, BMI should also be considered to arrive at conclusion and variation of 5Kg +/- from the minimum/maximum limit may be accepted. Similarly, while measuring height fraction of cm less that 0.5 will be ignored and 0.5 cm & more will be rounded off to the next higher cm. Standard height weight chart is attached as Annexure I’

¶30

[Emphasis Supplied]”

¶31

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner’s case is covered in terms of the General Instructions inasmuch as the height of the petitioner having been measured at 164.7 cm, the same has to be rounded off to the next higher cm which is 165 cm. In that sense, he shall meet the eligibility condition.

¶32

We also reproduce paragraph 14 of the order passed by this Court in Priyanshu Raj v. Union of India & Ors. (supra) wherein we have stated as under:

¶33

“14. In addition, the Manual of Medical Examination and Medical Standards for various entries into Army, TRG Academies and MIL Schools, which is an appendix to DGMS (Army) letter 76054/policy/DGMS-5A dated 16.07.2019 has come to our attention while hearing proceedings in a different writ petition. The said Manual at Section 2 provides for Anthropometric Standards for measurement of height, weight and chest circumference of the candidates. The method of recording the measurement of the height is set out at paragraph 48 (a), which reads as under:

¶34

Method of Examination.

¶35

48. The three basic measurements which are required to be carried out for all candidates are height, weight and chest circumference. In certain instances two more measurements, namely waist circumference and hip circumference, may be required for further assessment. In order to standardize these measurements, the recruiting equipment (weighing scales, anthropometric rods and tape

¶36

W.P.(C) 2638/2026

¶37

Page 3 of 5

¶38

Signature Not Verified

¶39

Digitally Signed By:HEMANT PRATAP SINGH Signing Date:28.02.2026 12:24:03

¶40

measures) must be procured centrally and provided to all establishments. The method of recording these measurements is given below;-

¶41

(a) Height . The measurement of height requires a vertical board with an attached metric rule and a horizontal headboard that can be brought into contact with the uppermost point of the head. The individual to be measured should be bare foot and wearing little clothing so that the positioning of the body can be seen. He/she should stand on a flat surface, with weight distributed evenly on both feet, knees straight, heels together and the head positioned so that the line of vision is perpendicular to the body. The arms should hang freely by the side and the head, back, buttocks and heels are in contact with the vertical board. The Individual is asked to inhale deeply and maintain a fully erect position. The movable headboard is brought onto the topmost point on the head with sufficient pressure to compress the hair. The height is recorded to the nearest cm.

¶42

The said paragraph 48 (a) as well notes that the height of the candidate is to be recorded to the nearest centimeter (cm).

¶43

This is the standard prescribed by DGMS in the Manual for the medical teams, who have to undertake the examination of the candidates for these measurements. The said paragraph 48 (a) also supports the contentions canvassed by the Petitioner and applying the said method as well the Petitioner was entitled to rounding off to 165 cm at the stage of PST.”

¶44

A perusal of the paragraph 14 quoted above also reveals that paragraph 48(a) notes that the height of the candidate is to be recorded to the nearest centimetre.

¶45

If that be so, appropriate is for the respondents to decide the case of

¶46

W.P.(C) 2638/2026

¶47

Page 4 of 5

¶48

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HEMANT PRATAP SINGH Signing Date:28.02.2026 12:24:03

¶49

the petitioner on the basis of the judgment rendered by us and as referred to, above and pass a detailed and a speaking order within a period of two weeks from today.

¶50

If the decision is in favour of the petitioner, he shall be allowed to appear in PET, the next stage. Thereafter, the parties shall proceed in accordance with law/the recruitment notification.

¶51

The petition is disposed of. Pending application is disposed of.

¶52

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

¶53

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J

¶54

FEBRUARY 25, 2026/ msh

¶55

W.P.(C) 2638/2026

¶56

Page 5 of 5

¶57

Signature Not Verified

¶58

Digitally Signed By:HEMANT PRATAP SINGH Signing Date:28.02.2026 12:24:03

Krishan Murari Meena v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishan Murari Meena v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nikhil Nijhawan & Anr. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Shishupal Chauhan & Ors. Vs Delhi Development Authority

Kailash Jain Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Raj Bindu Charitable Trust Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Babu Khan Vs DDA

Ran Singh Vs Nadal Officer / Adm (New Delhi) & Ors.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Hfo Murali Dhar Yadav

M/S. Daani Enterprises Vs Joint Commissioner Directorate General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence

M/S L J Contractors Pvt. Ltd. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Union of India & Ors. Vs 777792 Sgt Praveen Kumar Upadhyay (Retd.)

Jagdamba Singh Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Union of India and Ors. Vs Ex Maj Vivek Prakash

Mukesh Kumar Vs Union of India and Anr.

Ct Raju Ranjan Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.