The Madurai Bench dismissed a writ petition challenging an order rejecting a petitioner for recruitment due to insufficient height, relying on video evidence confirming the failure to meet minimum height standards.
No costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.08.2017 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
WP(MD)No.14471 of 2017 and WMP(MD)No.11345 of 2017
K.Renugadevi
... Petitioner
vs.
Thoothukudi. ... Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order vide C.No.R2/150/2017 dated 31.07.2017 on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents to hold re-measurement of petitioner's height and proceed with further process in the Common Recruitment for the posts of Gr.II Police Constables (Men, Women & Third Gender), Gr.II Jail Warders (Men & Women) and Firemen for the year 2017.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkateswaran
For Respondents : Mr.B.Pugalendhi
Additional Advocate General assistedby Mr.A.K.Baskarapandian,
Special Government Pleader ORDER
The prayer in the writ petition is for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order vide C.No.R2/150/2017 dated 31.07.2017 on the file of the 2nd respondent to quash the same and direct the respondents to hold re-measurement of petitioner's height and proceed with further process in the Common Recruitment for the posts of Gr.II Police Constables (Men, Women & Third Gender), Gr.II Jail Warders (Men & Women) and Firemen for the year 2017.
2.The impugned order has been questioned on the ground that during physical efficiency test, the petitioner's height had not https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ been measured properly, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
2
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(AD-II)
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
NBI
VB/MR/KKR/SAR1/11/09/2017/2P/4C
WP(MD)No.14471 of 2017 18.08.2017
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking re-measurement of petitioner's height and quashing of impugned order should be entertained.
Whether video evidence showing petitioner failed to meet minimum height requirement is sufficient to dismiss the petition.
Whether to proceed with further process in the Common Recruitment given the height discrepancy.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
K.Renugadevi
The Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Chennai
The Recruitment Sub Committee, Thoothukudi Centre
Justice T.Raja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
