Can’t Prescribe Two Standards For Promotion When Both Streams Would Lead To Promotion To Same Post: Delhi HC Grants Relaxation In Height To CISF Constable
The Delhi High Court granted relaxation in height to a CISF constable applying to the Post of ASI and observed that there cannot be two standards prescribed, one for the regular promotion while one for the promotion through LDCE, when both streams would lead to promotion to the same post.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla & Justice Shalinder Kaur said, “In our view, denying the petitioner of this avenue of accelerated promotion would be totally arbitrary.”
Advocate Rajat Arora represented the Petitioner while CGSC Jagdish Chandra represented the Respondent.
The petitioner, working as a Constable (General Duty) in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), had approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of directions to the respondents to allow the petitioner to participate in the PET/PST. The petitioner had also pleaded before the Court to quash the required height of 165 cm in terms of the advertisement.
The petitioner, in this case, had applied to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector [Executive] (ASI) pursuant to the advertisement issued by the respondent through the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE). Through this exam, 706 vacancies in the CISF for the recruitment year of 2022 were to be filled and only eligible candidates who had completed five years of regular service in their respective posts were allowed to appear for the LDCE.
The petitioner qualified the written examination. He was, thereafter, required to appear for the Physical Efficiency Test (PET) and the Physical Standard Test (PST) which were to be conducted. However, on reaching the said destination, the petitioner was not allowed to participate in the PET and PST due to his height not being 165cms as required by the advertisement. The Petitioner was again called , called for a re-measurement of his height but he was issued a rejection slip, stating that his height was less than the required height of 165cms.
It was the Petitioner’s case that it would be arbitrary to insist on the petitioner, who has already been inducted into the Force, the increased parameter of height to gain promotion through the LDCE. However, it was the case of the respondents that the advertisement gave a relaxation of height standard to the candidates from North-Eastern States, including Manipur, however, the petitioner failed to meet the same.
The Bench noticed that the petitioner was appointed as a Constable (GD) extending due relaxation in the minimum height requirement provided to the candidates hailing from North-Eastern States in the Notice for Recruitment of Constables (GD) in CAPFs and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles, 2013 which prescribed the minimum height of 162.5 cms for a male candidate from the North-Eastern States. The same standard was prescribed even in the Notice for Recruitment of Constables (GD) in CAPFs, SSF, and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles Examination, 2024 issued on 24.11.2023.
The only issue to be determined was whether the respondents can deny an accelerated promotion to the petitioner if the petitioner clears the LDCE.
“There cannot be two standards prescribed, one for the regular promotion while one for the promotion through LDCE, when both streams would lead to promotion to the same post. Such differential prescription shall be arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India”, the Bench said.
The Bench placed reliance upon the judgments in Tholu Rocky v. Director General CISF & Ors. W.P(C) 9085/2011, and Inspector TD Cyril Mimin Zou v. Union of India & Ors W.P(C) 11133/2024, wherein as per the guidelines set out by the Staff Selection Commission (SSC), the requisite relaxation in height had been granted to the petitioner. It has also been affirmed in these cases that there is no justification for not providing the relaxation of height to the petitioner therein, as if the same is not granted, the petitioner will suffer stagnation without an opportunity to seek promotion to ascend in the hierarchy.
“Keeping in view the aforementioned decisions of this Court, we are of the view that the petitioner be granted the requisite relaxation in height as well”, the Bench held while allowing the Writ Petition.
The Bench further directed, “The respondents, subject to the petitioner qualifying all the other criteria of the selection process, are directed to permit the petitioner to take part in the ongoing selection process after granting him the necessary relaxation in height and thereafter, consider his candidature for promotion through the LDCE.”
Cause Title: Nongthombam Herojit Meite V. Union of India and Anr [Neutral Citation- 2024:DHC: 8868-DB]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Rajat Arora, Niraj Kumar, Sourabh and Ravi Ranjan Mishra
Respondent: CGSC Jagdish Chandra, Advocates Shubham Kumar Mishra, Vasuchit Anand, and AC, CISF. G. S. Rathore,
