Dismissed¶38

Karthigai Selvan v. The Chairman

TNUSRB recruitment – height measurement

Madras HC17 Mar 2025WA(MD)/1090/2024

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: TNUSRB; Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board; uniformed services recruitment; physical measurement test; height measurement; digital measurement redo/re-measurement; required height 170 cm; 0.5 cm relaxation; zone of consideration; height 169.1; compliance report; contempt petition; Clause 15 Letters Patent; writ appeal W.A(MD)No.1090 of 2024; CMP(MD)No.8230 of 2024; W.P(MD)No.3027 of 2024; WP(MD)No.2971 of 2024 batch; interim order 17.02.2025; dismissed 17.03.2025; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; J.Nisha Banu J.; S.Srimathy J.

What did the court decide?

Pursuant to the Court's direction, digital height re-measurement was carried out; the appellant's height was found to be 169.1 and he did not come within the zone of consideration. ¶37

Karthigai Selvan Vs The Chairman — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

W.A(MD)No.1090 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 17.03.2025

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

¶6

W.A(MD)No.1090 of 2024 and CMP(MD)No.8230 of 2024

Karthigai Selvan

... Appellant

vs.

The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Old Commissioner of Police Office Campus, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

¶11

The Chairperson, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Sub Committee, Dindigul Centre, Dindigul. ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 18.03.2024 made in W.P(MD)No.3027 of 2024.

¶13

For Appellant : Mr.R.Venkatesan For Respondent : Mr.Veera Kathiravan

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

1/6

¶16

W.A(MD)No.1090 of 2024

¶17

Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr.M.Sarangan Additional Government Pleader

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

(Judgment of the Court was made by J.NISHA BANU, J. )

¶20

This writ appeal is filed against the order dated 18.03.2024 made in W.P(MD)No.3027 of 2024.

¶21

Earlier on 17.02.2025, when the batch of writ appeals came

¶22

up for hearing, considering the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners that the digital measurement was not done in a proper manner, we directed the appellants to re-do the process of digital measurement for measuring the height of the writ petitioners. The said order is extracted hereunder:

¶23

'' The batch of writ appeals in WA(MD)Nos.1090 to 2497 & 2406 of 2024 have been preferred against the order of the writ Court passed in WP(MD)No.2971 of 2024 batch, dated 18.03.2024, thereby directed the officials to relax the required height measurement to an extent of 0.5 cm for the purpose of height measurement in the physical measurement test and to qualify them for the purpose of recruitment.

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

2/6

¶26

W.A(MD)No.1090 of 2024

¶27

2. Other two writ appeals in WA(MD)Nos.1070 and 1090 of 2024 have been preferred against the same order of the writ Court passed in WP(MD)No.2971 of 2024 batch, dated 18.03.2024, thereby dismissed the relevant writ petitions holding that the petitioners therein would not come within the zone of consideration by acquiring required height of 170 cm on relaxation, even if they would be given with relaxation to the extent of 0.5 cm with respect to height measurement.

¶28

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board (TNUSRB), would state that digital measurement has been followed to have accurate height measurement, to all the candidates who have participated in recruitment process.

¶29

4. At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the candidates / writ petitioners, would state that the digital measurement was not done in a proper manner and would pray to do the same once again.

¶30

5. The Additional Advocate General would state that if the Court so directs, then the said procedure would be done once again.

¶31

6. Considering the submissions made on either side, this Court hereby directs the Chairman of the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board (TNUSRB), to do digital (height) measurement once again for all the writ petitioners, who are aggrieved before this Court and file a report before this Court on or before 17.03.2025. The

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

3/6

¶34

W.A(MD)No.1090 of 2024

¶35

authorities shall fix a place in Chennai and shall communicate the redoing process of digital (height) measurement to all the writ petitioners, who are before this Court. In the meanwhile, the writ petitioners shall not precipitate the contempt petition till the report is filed by the Government.

¶36

7. Post the matter on 17.03.2025.''

¶37

Today, the learned Additional Advocate General has filed a compliance report stating that as per the orders of this Court, the digital measurement has been done to re-measure the height of the appellant. On re-measurement, the height of the appellant herein/writ petitioner was found to be 169.1 and he has not come within the zone of consideration.

¶38