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
5 paragraphs · 201 wordsNarayan Roy, J.—Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks direction upon the respondents to appoint him on the post of police constable pursuant to advertisement No. 1 of 1998.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was successful candidate in the physical test, but his height was found to be less than the requisite height. However, the petitioner was remeasured where his height was determined to be 173.5 c.m. and the persons of Scheduled Caste Category, to which the petitioner belongs, having height of 173.5 c.m. have been appointed.
It is not the case of the petitioner that the persons having lesser height of the category of the petitioner have been appointed.
Learned counsel for the State, with reference to counter affidavit, submitted that no candidate of lesser height in the Scheduled Caste Category, has been appointed and since there is no vacancy pursuant to advertisement No. 1 of 1998, the case of the petitioner cannot be reconsidered for appointment on the post of police constable.
In view of the statement made at the Bar, in my opinion, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.
