1. Constable challenged medical unfitness for selection to Sub-Inspector post via Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) after failing the detailed medical examination stage. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 7 , 9 , 10 )
Back
Next 
2023 Supreme(SC) 1181
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABHAY S. OKA, PANKAJ MITHAL, JJ.
Pavnesh Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 3641 of 2023
Decided On : 28-11-2023
Important Points
IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Selection – Medical unfitness – Selection was to be conducted in terms of advertisement.
(2) Promotion – Appointment to a higher post of an incumbent working on lower post is in form of an accelerated promotion but it cannot be equated with normal mode of promotion.
(1) Selection – Medical unfitness – Selection was to be conducted in terms of advertisement.
(2) Promotion – Appointment to a higher post of an incumbent working on lower post is in form of an accelerated promotion but it cannot be equated with normal mode of promotion.
Subject
Employment Law - Medical Fitness for Promotion
Headnote
(A) Service Law – Selection – Medical unfitness – In view of terms and conditions of advertisement for post of Sub-Inspector (GD) through LDCE, candidates were supposed to successfully complete first four stages of examination and then have to be medically declared fit for the post in fifth stage – Declaration of medically fit after undergoing four stages of examination was in addition to eligibility condition of being in medical category SHAPE-I which was a condition precedent for participating in LDCE – Declaration of any candidate in medical category SHAPE-I was not sufficient enough to treat him to be medically fit for the post – Appellant was never declared medically fit in process of selection for post of Sub-Inspector (GD) – Appellant never successfully qualified all five stages of examination as advertised for selection to post of Sub-Inspector (GD) through LDCE – Selection was to be conducted in terms of advertisement – Judgment and order of High Court dismissing writ petition upholding decision of Medical Board declaring appellant as medically unfit does not suffer from any error of law or fact. (Paras 8, 9, 15 and 18)
(B) Service Law – Promotion – Appointment to a higher post of an incumbent working on lower post is in form of an accelerated promotion but it cannot be equated with normal mode of promotion – Distinction has to be drawn between a normal promotion and promotion by selection through LDCE – Promotion by selection through LDCE vis-à-vis competitive examination is a facility or a chance given for out of their promotion without waiting for normal course of promotion – It in effect is selection through competitive examination within limited category of candidates and cannot be equated with normal promotion. (Paras 14 and 16)
Facts of the case:
Appellant who was working as a constable with the Border Security Force (BSF), applied for the post of Sub-Inspector General Duty (GD) through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) 2018-19 but was declared medically unfit and the said order was not disturbed even in the review medical examination by Board of three doctors.
Findings of Court:
There is no review of the medical of appellant and the declaration that he is “medically unfit”, is not contrary to any earlier reports as he was never declared to be medically fit in the process of examination for selection to Sub-Inspector (GD) through LDCE.
Result : Appeal dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Alakh Alok Srivastava, AOR Mr. Chandan Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv. Mr. Narayan Dev Parashar, Adv. Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, Adv. Mr. Balendu Shekhar, Adv. Mr. Vinayak Sharma, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Alakh Alok Srivastava, AOR Mr. Chandan Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv. Mr. Narayan Dev Parashar, Adv. Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, Adv. Mr. Balendu Shekhar, Adv. Mr. Vinayak Sharma, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR
Table of Contents
2. Appellant contended that prior medical fitness for routine duty precluded subsequent unfitness for selection and that normal promotion medical standards should apply to LDCE. (Para 6 , 11 , 13 )
3. The court distinguished between routine annual medical fitness for eligibility and detailed medical examination for selection, noting LDCE is a competitive selection process, not normal promotion. (Para 8 , 12 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 )
4. Selection through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination is a competitive selection process distinct from normal promotion, requiring adherence to specific medical standards prescribed in the advertisement. (Para 14 , 16 )
5. Appeal dismissed and the High Court order upholding the medical board's decision of unfitness was affirmed. (Para 18 )
6. Does a candidate's medical fitness for routine duty (SHAPE-I) guarantee fitness for selection to a higher post via LDCE?
No. Medical category SHAPE-I is a condition precedent for applying, whereas the detailed medical examination is a separate, additional stage of the selection process. Fitness for routine duty does not equate to fitness for the specific requirements of the higher post. (Para 8 , 12 )
7. Is selection through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) equivalent to a normal promotion?
No. LDCE is a competitive selection process among eligible candidates providing a facility for out-of-turn promotion. It is distinct from the normal course of promotion and is governed by the specific terms and conditions of the selection advertisement. (Para 14 , 16 )
8. Should normal promotion medical standards apply to selections made through LDCE?
No. Since LDCE is a selection process rather than a normal promotion, the specific medical standards and stages prescribed in the selection advertisement must be applied. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 )
JUDGMENT :
Pankaj Mithal, J.
1. Learned counsel appearing for the parties were heard.
2. The appellant who was working as a constable with the Border Security Force (BSF), applied for the post of Sub-Inspector General Duty (GD) through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) 2018-19 but was declared medically unfit and the said order was not disturbed even in the review medical examination by Board of three doctors.
3. Aggrieved by the above action of the respondent BSF declaring him medically unfit for the post of Sub-Inspector (GD) through LDCE, the appellant preferred a writ petition before the Delhi High Court for quashing the medical result dated 27.02.2020 of the review medical examination and for a direction to the respondent BSF to treat him medically fit.
4. The writ petition (civil) so filed by the appellant was dismissed by the High Court vide impugned order dated 24.09.2020.
5. In the above factual scenario, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
6. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant was found medically fit on 16.12.2019 and as such the respondent BSF was not competent to declare him unfit subsequently on 23.12.2019. The appellant underwent a small surgery whereupon he was found to be medically fit for the post but even then, the review medical examination on 27.02.2020 declined to clear him as medically fit to hold the post of Sub-Inspector (GD).
7. The appellant was appointed as a Constable (GD) with the BSF w.e.f. 04.04.2012. After the appellant had put in about 8 years of service as a Constable, an advertisement was issued by the respondent BSF inviting applications from serving BSF Male/Female Constables (GD), Head Constables (GD), ASI (GD) etc for selection to the post of Sub Inspector (GD) through LDCE 2018-19. The advertisement provided for the eligibility conditions and for the scheme of examination. The eligibility conditions provided; (i) the upper age limit of 32 years on the closing date of application for appearing in LDCE; (ii) that the candidate should have completed 4 years of service including basic training; (iii) graduation with unblemished clean record of entire service until the issuance of offer of appointment; and (iv) must fulfil the physical standards laid down. Another eligibility condition was that candidate should qualify SHAPE-I medical category. The scheme of examination consisted of five stages. In the stage-I, service records were to be checked and verified, in stage-II, the candidates were to undergo written examination (OMR based), stage-III was of a physical measurements (PST) and stage-IV was a physical efficiency test (PET). Upon successful completion of all the above four stages, the candidates were to undergo detailed medical examination i.e. stage-V wherein they must be declared medically fit for the post.
8. In view of the above terms and conditions of the advertisement for the post of Sub-Inspector (GD) through LDCE, the candidates were supposed to successfully complete the first four stages of the examination and then have to be medically declared fit for the post in the fifth stage. The declaration of medically fit after undergoing the four stages of the examination was in addition to the eligibility condition of being in the medical category SHAPE-I which was a condition precedent for participating in LDCE. The declaration of any candidate in the medical category SHAPE-I was not sufficient enough to treat him to be medically fit for the post.
9. The appellant was issued a call letter dated 16.11.2019 by the recruitment officer to appear in the detailed medical examination for selection to the post of Sub-Inspector (GD) in BSF through LDCE 2018-19. The said letter indicates that the appellant was called for stage-V detailed medical examination on 23.12.2019. Upon such medical examination on the aforesaid date, the appellant was not found medically fit for the reason that he suffered from Right Sided Varicocele, Varicose Vein left calf, Tac
