The Superintendent Of Police, Jaisalmer vs Vikram Singh Meena Son Of Shri Ram Swarup Meena, Aged

Kamal Kishore Sankhla S/o Shri Ramji Lal Sankhla, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of G-152, Narsingh Nagar, Near By Ganesh Colony, Jhotwara, Jaipur, (Raj.) ----Respondent Connected With D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 537/2024 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2213/2019

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Director General Of Police, Phq, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Inspector General Of Police (Recruitment), Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. The Superintendent Of Police, Jaisalmer ----Department Versus Vikram Singh Meena Son Of Shri Ram Swarup Meena, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of Village Naswara, Post Halena, Tehsil Weir, Distt. Bharatpur, Rajasthan. ----Respondent D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 590/2024 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.15/2019

1. State Of Rajasthan, Department Of Home, Through Its [2025:RJ-JP:38293-DB] (2 of 5) [SAW-525/2024] Secretary, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

2. Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Lalkothi, Jaipur (Raj.)

3. Inspector General Of Police (Recruitment), Police Head Quarter, Lalkothi, Jaipur (Raj.)

4. Superintendent Of Police, Alwar, District Alwar (Raj.) ----Department Versus Karan Singh Son Of Shri Shimbhu Dayal, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Village Dhelawas, Post Gopipura, Tehsil Mundawar, District Alwar (Raj.) ----Respondent D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 596/2024 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition NO.928/2019

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home, Govt. Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. The Director General Of Police, Police Headquarter, Jaipur. The Inspector General Of Police (Recruitment), Rajasthan, Jaipur.

4. The Superintendent Of Police, Bikaner. ----Department Versus Ravi Kumar Meena S/o Angad Meena, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Bhutyapura, Post Inayati, Tehsil Sapotra, District Karauli, Rajasthan. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Samee Khan, AAAG Ms. Sunita Meena, AGC on behalf of Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG For Respondent(s) : Mr. Krishna Verma, Adv. Mr. Banwari Lal Sharma, Adv. Mr. Namo Narayan Sharma, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL [2025:RJ-JP:38293-DB] (3 of 5) [SAW-525/2024] 18/09/2025 Order These appeals have been filed by the appellants (hereinafter to be referred as ‘Department’) against the order dated

26.02.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the learned Single Judge while allowing the writ petition directed the department for holding fresh physical efficiency test with regard to height and chest measurement of the respondents (hereinafter to be referred as ‘petitioners’. Brief facts of the case are that the Department issued an advertisement dated 25.05.2018 inviting online applications from the eligible candidates for filling up various posts of Constable under various categories. The written examination was held and the physical efficiency test was conducted of the successful candidates. All the respondents herein belong to SC/ST category and they appeared in the physical efficiency test. After declaring of final result when the petitioners were not selected, the petitioners filed writ petitions before the learned Single Judge alleging therein that they were wrongly denied appointment by the Department. The writ petitions were allowed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 26.02.2024. Hence, these appeals have been filed on behalf of the Department. Counsel for the Department submitted that the petitioners were not selected in the process of selection as in their physical efficiency test, their chest/height measurement were found lower to the criteria fixed and all the petitioners have availed relaxation being the candidate of SC/ST category as per Rule 14(2)(iii) of Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989. Counsel further [2025:RJ-JP:38293-DB] (4 of 5) [SAW-525/2024] submits that since the sufficient number of candidates were available in their respective category, therefore the petitioners were not selected being lower in merit in their respective category. Counsel further submits that no interim order was passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ petitions filed on behalf of the petitioners and after a delay of six years re-measurement of the candidates with regard to their chest and height would not be justifiable. Counsel further submits that the Department mentioned in their reply filed before the learned Single Judge with regard to provision of the rules on account of which the respondents were not selected but the said provision/rule has not been considered by the learned Single Judge while deciding the writ petitions and prayed for allowing the appeal. Counsel for the petitioners opposed the submissions made by counsel for the Department. Counsel further submits that there is provision of appeal in the advertisement issued by the department that in case any candidate is declared unfit in physical standards may file appeal on the same date. Counsel further submits that the Department has not informed the petitioners that they have availed the relaxation in the chest and height measurement. Counsel further submits that the petitioners were higher in merit than the selected candidate despite that they have not been selected. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. These appeals filed on behalf of the Department deserves to be allowed for the reasons; firstly, the selection in question relates to the year 2018 and after passing of more than six years asking the department for re-measurement of the height and chest of the [2025:RJ-JP:38293-DB] (5 of 5) [SAW-525/2024] petitioners, in our considered view is not justified as the selection process has already been over and as informed by the counsel for the Department in subsequent years fresh selections on the post of Constable has also been made; secondly, in view of Rule 14(2) (iii) of Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989, the petitioners have availed the relaxation with regard to chest and height measurement and therefore, the department is justified in not selecting the petitioners-respondents as there are sufficient number of candidates available in their respective category who have not availed the relaxation; thirdly, admittedly, there was no interim order passed by the learned Single Judge in favour of the petitioners during pendency of the writ petitions; therefore, in our considered view, no direction can be issued at this belated stage for re-measurement of height and chest of the petitioners. In view of the above discussion, these appeals are allowed. The order dated 26.02.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J Jyoti/145-148