One centimetre cost a young man a job. The Gauhati High Court has now asked the authorities to measure him again.
What happened
A candidate applied for the post of Constable (General Duty) in the Central Armed Police Forces and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles under the 2025 recruitment drive.
At the Physical Standard Test (PST), his height was recorded as 164 cm on 26 August 2025. The minimum required is 165 cm.
He was rejected. Just one centimetre short.
The appeal that went nowhere
The PST rejection slip itself told him he could appeal in writing on the same day. He did.
Then things dragged. He first went to the High Court, which told the authorities to decide his appeal quickly. That did not happen, so he filed a contempt petition. While that was pending, he was informed on 12 May that his appeal had been rejected.
So he went back to the High Court a second time.
What the court noticed
Justice Nelson Sailo heard the matter on 12 August 2026. The judge spotted a simple problem.
The order rejecting the appeal did not show that the candidate had been measured again. The authorities had simply gone back to the same 164 cm reading taken at the recruitment centre months earlier.
In other words, the appeal was decided using the very measurement the appeal was against.
The court directed the authorities to measure his height afresh and inform him of the result.
Why this matters
An appeal is supposed to be a real second look. If the appellate authority just repeats the first reading, the candidate gains nothing by appealing.
Height measurement also has a margin of error. Posture, footwear, the equipment used and even the time of day can shift a reading by a centimetre. That is exactly why a fresh check matters when the gap is this small.
For lakhs of young people preparing for police and paramilitary jobs, a centimetre is not a technicality. It is the whole career.
Similar cases in other courts
Calcutta High Court: On 4 August 2026, the court set aside a Review Medical Examination Board decision that declared a CAPF constable candidate unfit for a "winged scapula". Justice Reetobroto Kumar Mitra held that rejection cannot rest on clinical findings alone. It needs confirmatory tests and, where required, specialist opinion. A fresh medical examination was ordered.
Delhi High Court: On 1 July 2026, Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan dismissed pleas by two serving personnel denied promotion to Assistant Commandant over tattoos on their saluting arm. The court said members of disciplined forces cannot claim they did not know the rules, and that removing a tattoo later does not cure ineligibility that existed at the time of applying.
Quick answers
What was the candidate's height?
164 cm, recorded on 26 August 2025. The minimum required was 165 cm.
What did the Gauhati High Court order?
It directed the authorities to measure his height again and communicate the result to him.
Did the court say he must be selected?
No. The order is about a fresh measurement, not guaranteed selection.
Which post was he applying for?
Constable (General Duty) in the CAPF and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles, under the 2025 recruitment process.
No comments:
Post a Comment