Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47317 Court No. - 8 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6067 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sachchidanand Sahu Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Yadav,Nidhi Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the state/the opposite parties. 2. A rejoinder affidavits to the counter affidavits filed earlier by opposite party Nos.3 and 5, have been filed and are taken on record. 3. This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the opposite parties to conduct a re-medical test of the petitioner by constituting a Medical Board for the post of Constable in Civil Police, in pursuance of an advertisement dated December 23rd, 2023. 4. The primary ground of challenge raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is with regard to a Notification dated May 15th, 2025, brought on record as part of Annexure-5 to the writ petition. Learned counsel submits that while the petitioner's candidature has been rejected on the ground of being under height, similar remarks regarding persons appearing at serial numbers 3, 4, and 7, namely, Shivam Singh, Ankit, and Kumari Shalini Devi, have been declared successful, although they had been declared unsuccessful by the District Board on the same ground. Learned counsel has adverted to paragraph-11 of the writ petition, clearly stating the aforesaid submission. 5. Learned State Counsel, on the basis of a counter-affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party No. 3, submits that the medical examination of the petitioner was done by the District Board on April 22nd, 2025, and since the petitioner did not meet the standard height of 168 cm, as prescribed, he was declared unfit due to being under height. It has also been submitted that an opportunity was given to file an appeal before the Medical Board, which was also rejected on the same ground. It is further submitted that since the petitioner clearly did not meet the cut- off with respect to height, the prayer as made is not required to be considered, especially since his medical appeal has also been rejected. 6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the material on record, it is evident from the letter dated May 15th, 2025, which is a part of Annexure-5 to the writ petition, that the petitioner has been declared unsuccessful on the ground of being under height. However, the said letter also indicates, as indicated here in above, that other similarly situated persons who were rejected by the District Board on the ground of being under height, have thereafter been declared successful. Such an assertion made in paragraph-9 of the writ petition has not been denied in paragraph-6 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party No. 5. In such circumstances, discrimination against the petitioner is self-evident. Consequently, a writ in the nature of mandamus is issued directing the opposite parties to conduct a re-medical test of the petitioner and also to advert to reasons why similarly situated persons such as the petitioner have been declared successful despite being rejected by the District Board on the ground of being under height. 7. With the above observations/directions this writ petition is disposed of. (Manish Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 13.8.2025 A.Nigam Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench