JUDGMENT
Mukundakam Sharma, J.
1. Pursuant to an advertisement issued by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board dated 30th April, 1999 calling applications for filling up the posts of Fire Operators in Delhi Fire Service, Government of N.C.T. of Delhi, the petitioners submitted their applications.
2. The petitioners along with many applicants were called for written examination which was held on 14th November, 1999. The petitioners qualified/cleared the said written examination. Thereafter the petitioners were called for by the respondents for further physical and medical test. Finally, however, the names of the petitioners were not included in the list of the selected candidates and hence the present petition in this Court seeking for a direction to the respondents to have a new selection Board and conduct a fresh physical endurance test, swimming and driving test of all the candidates who have cleared the written examination with a further prayer for quashing the list of the selected candidates declared to have been selected on the basis of physical endurance test.
3. The respondents No. 1 to 4 filed the counter affidavit contending, inter alia, that according to the Rules, the selection procedure for filling up the post of Fire Operators in Delhi Fire Service consisted of a written test and test of physical standards and physical endurance test and driving test and that a candidate has to undergo all the process to qualify and to be appointed as Fire Operator. It is stated that according to the said procedure, a candidate who clears the written test is supposed to fulfill physical standards under the rules and that even when a candidate fulfills the physical standards, the candidate must not have any disqualification which, inter alia, according to the Rules include knock-knee, flat foot, wearing glasses, squint eyes, colour blindness or any deformity in any limb/ extra limb. It was contended that the petitioners though had cleared written test but were found having physical disqualification in physical standards and, therefore they were not allowed to take endurance test as they were not found suitable for the said post.
4. In the light of the aforesaid pleadings of the parties, I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and have also perused the records placed before me including the records of the selection process.
5. Mr. K.S. Bindra, senior counsel appearing for the petitioners challenged the results published only on the ground that no medical test was conducted by the respondents for the purpose of verification as to whether the petitioners had any physical disqualification in physical standards. In view of the aforesaid submission of the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, the scope of the present petition lies in a very narrow compass.
6. The petitioners qualified in the written test and were called for a further test to be carried out in terms of the Rules. According to the procedure laid down, a candidates who clears the written test has also to fulfill certain physical standards as prescribed under the Rules which were also specified in the advertisement itself. The advertisement also provided that a candidate to get himself selected should not possess any physical disqualifications in respect of physical standards such as, knock-knee, flat foot, wearing glasses, squint eyes, colour blindness or any deformity in any limb/extra limb, as stated hereinabove. From the records produced by the respondents relating to the selection process, it is crystal clear to me that the physical test was conducted by a Board which had recorded the outcome of the results in the physical test and physical disqualification, if any. The records also disclose that the petitioners were possessing physical disqualification due to which they could not be selected and, therefore, they were not allowed to take the endurance test. Result sheets containing nature of disqualification of each of the petitioners have been perused by me and the same disclose clearly the nature of disqualification f each of the petitioners. The said result sheets contain the signatures of the members of the Board and also of each of the petitioners. Therefore, contention of the counsel is belied by the records.
8. In view of the disqualifications concerning physical standards as set out in the advertisement, the petitioners did not satisfy the essential requirements and, therefore, they were not allowed to take endurance test nor were selected. It, therefore,e cannot be said that there is any illegality and/or irregularity in the decision making process of the Selection Board. I find no infirmity in the results announced by the respondents by not including the names of the petitioners in the list of successful candidates. The petition has not merit and is dismissed accordingly. Pending application also stands disposed of.