Dismissed

T.M.Raja v. the Member Secretary

Madras HC3 Jun 2020WA/285/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ appeal contesting rejection from police constable recruitment due to failing chest expansion measurement. The court found no material indicating malafides or procedural flaws in the spot measurement, disentitling the appellant to approach the Court under Article 226.

What did the court decide?

Writ Appeal No. 285 of 2020 and C.M.P. No. 4697 of 2020 are dismissed with no costs.

T.M.Raja Vs the Member Secretary — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

WA.No.285 of 2020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 03.06.2020

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

The Hon'ble Mr.A.P.SAHI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

¶8

W.A.No.285 of 2020
and C.M.P.No.4697 of 2020
T.M.Raja .. Appellant
-vs-
1.The Member Secretary,
Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services
Recruitment Board, Old Commissioner
of Police Campus, Pantheon Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.The Chairman / Sub-Committee,
Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services
Recruitment Board, Old Commissioner
of Police Campus, Pantheon Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur District. .. Respondents

¶9

Page 1 of 5

¶10

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶11

WA.No.285 of 2020

¶12

Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 06.12.2019 passed in W.P.No.34112 of 2019 on the file of this Court.

¶13

For Appellant : Mr.L.Dhamodharan
For Respondents : Mrs.Narmadha Sampath
Addl. Adv. General
Assisted by Mr.V.Kathirvelu,
Spl.G.P.
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional
Advocate General for the State.
2.The appellant fell short of the required chest expansion

¶14

measurement for selection on the post of Group-II Police Constable during the selection process. He has come up contending that the procedure deployed for such measurement was defective and that the appellant otherwise has been able to attain the required measurements in another selection relating to CRPF.

¶15

Page 2 of 5

¶16

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶17

WA.No.285 of 2020

¶18

3.We have considered the submissions raised and we have also

¶19

heard the learned Additional Advocate General, who submits that the chest expansion measurement is carried out on the spot at the time of physical inspection which is executed in terms of the rules, and the appellant having failed to acquire the required measurement on expansion, which fell short of 2 cms., there is no reason as to why there should be an interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶20

India.

¶21

4.Having considered the submissions raised, we are of the view

¶22

that there is no such material so as to indicate either any malafides or any procedural flaw so as to establish that the measurement carried out at the time of chest measurement of the appellant was flawed in any way or was in violation of any rules. There cannot be an enquiry into this, inasmuch as this being a matter of exercise undertaken by the respondents and the absence of any malafides or any violation of the rules or procedural flaw disentitles the appellant from approaching this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶23

Page 3 of 5

¶24

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶25

WA.No.285 of 2020

¶26

The Writ Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs.

¶27

Consequently, C.M.P.No.4697 of 2020 is also dismissed.

¶28

(A.P.S., CJ.) (S.K.R., J.)
03.06.2020
Index : Yes/No
sra
To
1.The Member Secretary,
Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services
Recruitment Board, Old Commissioner
of Police Campus, Pantheon Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.The Chairman / Sub-Committee,
Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services
Recruitment Board, Old Commissioner
of Police Campus, Pantheon Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur District.

¶29

Page 4 of 5

¶30

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶31

WA.No.285 of 2020

¶32

The Hon'ble Chief Justice and Senthilkumar Ramamoothy, J.

¶33

(sra)

¶34

W.A.No.285 of 2020
03.06.2020

¶35

Page 5 of 5

¶36

http://www.judis.nic.in

T.M.Raja v. the Member Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.M.Raja v. the Member Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.Janakiraman Vs the Railway Employees Co-Operative Credit

J.Prabhu Vs the State of Tamilnadu

The Oriental Benefit & Deposit Vs R.Janaki

N.Ekambaram Vs the Director of School Education

Karu Nachinar Kinian Vs Government of India

Institutionally Qualified Homeopathic Vs The Union of india