Ct. No.4 D/L 09.07.2026 (Naba) 07 M.A.T. 966 of 2024 With CAN 1 of 2024 CAN 2 of 2024 Union of India & Ors. Vs. Soumen Das Mr. Ajit Kumar Mishra, Ms. Amrita Pandey …for the Appellants Mr. Sudip Krishna Dutta, Mr. Barun Chatterjee …for the Respondent 1. Heard the learned advocate for the appellants and the learned advocate for the respondent. 2. The order passed in the writ proceeding records issues of fact, which are not in dispute regarding the petitioner being 0.5 cm. less than the height requisite for recruitment. 3. The Court, therefore, directed that the height should be rounded off to 170 cm. and the petitioner shall be considered valid on account of height. 4. The self-same issue has since been decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Union of India & Ors. Versus Atul Kumar Verma & Ors. in Civil Appeal No(s). 4423- 4426/2026 @ SLP (C) Nos 13390-13393/2026 @ Diary No. 68753/2025. 5. As per decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court, a candidate who participated in the process of 2 recruitment of constables (GD) in the force and his height is found/measured as 169.5 centimetres and above, then 0.5 would have to be ignored. 169.5 cm. and more would have to be rounded off to the next higher centimetre, i.e. 170 cm. Such candidate cannot be disqualified on ground of less height, if they are 169.5 centimetres or above. 6. The Hon’ble Apex Court passed such order in an appeal in identical circumstances as arising for consideration in the present case. 7. The judgement of the learned Single Judge, therefore, does not merit any interference. 8. At this juncture, the learned advocate for the Union of India submitted that this Court should direct consideration of the petitioner’s seniority prospectively from the date of the present order. 9. Since we found no substance in the challenge to the order of the learned Single Judge, there is no basis to record such findings. 10. The order of the Hon’ble Single Judge requires no interference. 11. Lastly, it is submitted by the learned advocate for the Union of India that the Union of India proposes to file a review before the Apex Court in the case of Atul Kumar Verma (supra). Such submission before this Court is of no avail, as we are not in a position to comment on such claim. 3 12. The appeal (MAT 966 of 2024) is accordingly disposed of. 13. Pending applications also stand disposed of. (Madhuresh Prasad, J.) (Prasenjit Biswas, J.)