CAPF Candidate's 164.6cm Height Must Be Rounded Off To 165cm; Rejection Prima Facie Illegal: Delhi High Court

Update: 2025-12-07 04:55 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

The Delhi High Court has granted interim relief to a CAPF aspirant, who was disqualified from recruitment to the post of Assistant Commandant for being 0.4cm short of minimum height prescribed in governing rules.A division bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla observed that in terms of the Uniform Guidelines for Medical Examination Test (Met) For Recruitment In Central...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Delhi High Court has granted interim relief to a CAPF aspirant, who was disqualified from recruitment to the post of Assistant Commandant for being 0.4cm short of minimum height prescribed in governing rules.

A division bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla observed that in terms of the Uniform Guidelines for Medical Examination Test (Met) For Recruitment In Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF), the Petitioner was entitled to the benefit of round-off.

Clause 2(d) of the Guidelines prescribes that while measuring height fraction of cm less that 0.5 will be ignored and 0.5 cm & more will be rounded off to the next higher cm.

“Clearly, in view of the concluding stipulation at Clause 2 (d) of the Guidelines, the height of the petitioner was entitled to be treated as 165 cms. This was the prescribed height standard for recruitment. As such, prima facie, the rejection of the petitioner's candidature on the basis of height was illegal,” the Court held.

However, as counsel for the Central government sought time to take instructions, the Court issued notice asking the authority to show cause “why rule nisi be not issued”.

Meanwhile, the Petitioner has been permitted to participate in the further rounds of selection, subject to the outcome of the writ petition.

The matter is now listed on December 16.

Appearance: Mr. Moksh Arora, Mr. Manish Kumar Srivastava, Mr. Hardik Vashisht and Mr. Santosh Ramdurg, Advs. for Petitioner; Mr. Jagdish Chandra Solanki, CGSC, Mr. Sujeet Choudhary and Mr. Siddharth Bajaj, Adv. for UOI/R-1 Mr Ravinder Agarwal, Mr. Manish Kumar Singh, Mr. Vasu Agarwal, and Mr. Lekh Raj Singh, Advs. for UPSC

Case title: Priyanshu Raj v. UoI

Case no.: W.P.(C) 18334/2025

Click here to read order

Tags:    

Similar News