Gauhati High Court Orders Fresh Height Check for CAPF Aspirant Rejected for 1 cm Shortfall

Guwahati: The Gauhati High Court has ordered a fresh height measurement for a Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) aspirant whose candidature was rejected after he was found to be one centimetre short of the prescribed minimum, holding that his appeal against the Physical Standard Test (PST) rejection had not involved any re-measurement.

Justice Nelson Sailo, while hearing the candidate’s second writ petition on August 12, 2026, found that the appellate authority had merely repeated the original PST reading of 164 cm, taken at the recruitment centre on August 26, 2025. The minimum required height for the post in question was 165 cm.

The petitioner had applied under the 2025 Staff Selection Commission recruitment for Constable (General Duty) in the CAPFs and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles. He was eliminated at the PST stage solely on the ground of height. According to the rejection slip issued at the recruitment centre, he was permitted to file a written appeal before the appellate authority on the same day through the Presiding Officer, which he did. But when that appeal was rejected, the High Court said there was nothing on record to show that his height had been measured again.

“As per the PST rejection slip…, while rejecting the candidature of the petitioner for deficiency of height, it was indicated that he may prefer an appeal in writing before the appellate authority on the same day through the Presiding Officer. The petitioner admittedly preferred the appeal, but from the rejection of the appeal it is not discernible that his height was re-measured,” Justice Sailo observed.

The court noted that the appeal rejection appeared to rely on the same measurement taken on August 26, 2025, and not on any independent reassessment. Since the prescribed minimum was 165 cm and the recorded height was 164 cm, the High Court directed the recruitment authorities to measure the petitioner afresh and inform him of the result.

How the dispute reached the second writ petition

The matter reached the High Court in stages. After the initial PST rejection, the candidate first approached the court, which directed the authorities to decide his pending appeal expeditiously. When that direction was not implemented, he filed a contempt petition. During the pendency of those contempt proceedings, the authorities informed him on May 12 that his appeal had been rejected. He then challenged that rejection through a fresh writ petition, which was the matter decided by Justice Sailo.

The available reports do not disclose the petitioner’s name. The order also does not say that he has been selected or that 164 cm should be treated as 165 cm. Instead, the relief is procedural: if the recruitment rules allow a height-based appeal, that appeal cannot simply echo the first measurement. The court has made clear that the candidate must be re-measured and the result communicated.

The applicable height standard

For Constable (GD) recruitment, the general male height requirement is 170 cm. However, the SSC notice dated September 5, 2024, provides relaxations for several categories. Male candidates from Assam, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, as well as those belonging to the Garhwali, Kumaoni, Dogra and Maratha groups, are required to meet 165 cm. That is the standard applied in this case. Additional relaxations are available for Scheduled Tribe candidates and for candidates from other North-Eastern states.

Height is assessed at the PST stage, which comes after the computer-based examination and the Physical Efficiency Test, and before the Detailed Medical Examination. A rejection at this stage on height grounds generally ends the candidature unless an appeal or a court order reopens the question of measurement.

Part of a wider set of height disputes

The Gauhati High Court’s order comes against the backdrop of repeated litigation over CAPF height measurements. The Ministry of Home Affairs’ Revised Uniform Guidelines of May 20, 2015, include Clause 2(d), under which a fraction of a centimetre below 0.5 is ignored, while 0.5 cm and above is rounded off to the next higher centimetre. Several High Courts have held that this rounding rule applies at the PST stage itself and cannot be deferred to the medical examination.

The Gauhati High Court has already applied that principle in other matters in 2025–26. In one batch of cases, candidates from Assam who had been measured at 164.5 cm, 164.6 cm, 164.7 cm and 164.8 cm were held entitled to be treated as 165 cm and allowed to proceed to the Detailed Medical Examination. In another case, a female candidate from Assam measured at 154.6 cm was treated as 155 cm, which is the relaxed minimum for women from the state.

Other high courts have taken similar positions. In October 2025, the Bombay High Court set aside the PST disqualification of two 21-year-old aspirants whose heights were recorded at 164.7 cm and 164.6 cm, describing the rejections as “illegal and arbitrary” and directing that their heights be rounded to 165 cm. The Delhi High Court has also granted interim relief in a case where a candidate measured 164.6 cm. The Madhya Pradesh High Court has rounded 169.6 cm to 170 cm in the case of a Sub-Inspector aspirant. At the same time, courts have been less inclined to interfere where the candidate falls below the 0.5 cm threshold; a Calcutta High Court bench, for instance, declined relief where the recorded height was 169.4 cm against a 170 cm requirement.

This case, however, is not one of those rounding-off disputes. The figure recorded here is 164 cm, a full centimetre below the relaxed 165 cm standard. The High Court’s intervention is therefore not about converting 164 into 165, but about ensuring that the appellate process is genuine and not a mere repetition of the original PST finding. A fresh measurement could confirm 164 cm, produce a decimal reading that may attract the rounding rule, or even show 165 cm or more. Until that happens, the candidate’s case remains alive only to the extent that the court has reopened the height assessment.

What the ruling means

The order does not alter the statutory height requirement for CAPF recruitment. Paramilitary selection continues to rest on fixed physical standards, and courts generally avoid rewriting those norms. Judicial interference is usually confined to situations where the measurement process is flawed, the appeal is not properly considered, or the 2015 guidelines are not followed.

For the petitioner, the practical consequence is limited but important. After nearly a year of proceedings — beginning with the PST in August 2025, followed by a first writ petition, a contempt case, an appeal rejection in May 2026 and then the second writ petition — the authorities must measure him again and tell him the result. If the fresh reading is 165 cm or more, he can move forward in the recruitment process. If the reading remains 164 cm, or stays below 164.5 cm without attracting the rounding rule, the original rejection may stand, but only after a proper second measurement has been carried out.

For recruitment authorities, the message is straightforward. Where a rejection slip itself allows a same-day appeal against a height disqualification, the appeal cannot be treated as a paper exercise. The candidate must be re-measured, and the appellate order must show that this was done. In a process where a single centimetre can decide whether an aspirant advances or is eliminated, the High Court has insisted that the number be checked properly before the door is closed.