Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) IN the writ application, the petitioners have prayed for a direction upon the respondent to appoint the petitioners on the post of Constable as they come within the zone of consideration. Pursuant to Advertisement No. 1 of 2004, both the petitioners had applied for being appointed to the post of Constable but although their names figured in the merit list no appointment letters were issued to them which has occasioned preferring the present writ application.
(2.) DURING the pendency of this writ application an order was passed on 6.10.2009 in which the appointing authority i.e. respondent No. 4 was directed to examine the contention of the petitioners and pass an appropriate reasoned order. In terms of the direction of this Court a reasoned order had been passed which has been brought on record in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioners by which the claim of the petitioners for being appointed as a police constable has been rejected vide letter as contained in Memo No. 1543 dated 5.5.2014. Heard Dr. S.N. Pathak, learned senior counsel for the petitioners and Mr. D.K. Dubey, learned Sr. S.C. -I for the respondents.
(3.) DR . S.N. Pathak, learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that initially the matter was examined by the Superintendent of Police, Koderma and on examination of the relevant documents, he had come to the conclusion that the petitioner No. 1 has received 15 marks whereas the petitioner No. 2 has received 14 marks and both of them comes within the zone of consideration. It has been submitted that in terms of the said letter of the Superintendent of Police, Koderma, the petitioners were directed to make themselves present before the Police Center, Hazaribagh. However, ignoring the earlier findings/directives of the Superintendent of Police, Koderma as well as the other high ranking officials an order was passed as contained in Memo No. 1543 dated 5.5.2014 by which on perusal of the Master Chart since the height of the petitioner was found to be .08 cm less than what had earlier been recorded by the Superintendent of Police, Koderma the marks obtained by the petitioner No. 1 on account of the height had been reduced from 8 to 7 marks. It has been submitted that since there is an apparent dispute with respect to the height of the petitioner as would appear from the letter issued by the Superintendent of Police, Koderma as well as the Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh the best remedy available is to get the height of the petitioner No. 1 re -measured by Civil Surgeon -cum -Chief Medical Officer, Hazaribagh who is the competent authority in such circumstances.;