High CourtsSingle Bench

Gagandeep vs State Of Punjab And Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 20 February 2026 · Citation: (2026) 02 P&H CK 1837

HON’BLE JUDGES
Jagmohan Bansal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 226, 227
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 1076 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 356 words

Jagmohan Bansal, J

1.

Mr. Arunjeet Singh Kakkar, Advocate appeared and filed his Power of Attorney on behalf of the petitioner with no objection from previous counsel. The same is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place.

2.

The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondents to reconduct his physical test regarding height and issue appointment letter for the post of Constable.

3.

The petitioner pursuant to advertisement dated 31.05.2016 applied for the post Constable. He successfully passed physical measurement and physical screening test. He was called for height measurement. His height was determined as 5 feet 11 inches. He claims his height is more than 6 feet. He should be awarded 15 marks qua height instead of 14 marks. If he is awarded 15 marks for height, his total marks would be 28. There are many candidates who have scored 28 marks and have been selected.

4.

Learned State counsel submits that height of the petitioner was remeasured and he was found 6 feet. He was awarded 15 marks for height and 13 for academic qualifications. His total marks came to be 28. He could not be selected because cut-off was 28 and he was younger than last selected candidate.

5.

Faced with this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that 62 posts were lying vacant still petitioner was not accommodated.

6.

On being confronted with said fact, learned State counsel submits that 195 seats were lying vacant in District Cadre because of interim orders of this Court. The matter was finally settled by this Court and eligible candidates have already been considered against aforesaid seats, nevertheless, petitioner may submit his claim and competent authority would re-examine the same in accordance with law.

7.

Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to the aforesaid arrangement.

8.

In the wake of statement of both sides, the petition stands disposed of with liberty to petitioner to move an appropriate application which shall be considered and addressed by competent authority in accordance with law within 6 months from the date of filing.