Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ANIRUDDHA ROY
Ripan Biswas – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initial medical examination declared petitioner unfit based on carrying angle. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. re-medical examination ordered due to discrepancies in medical findings. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. court emphasized the constitutional right to employment and due process. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 4. rejection of candidature quashed; petitioner must be accommodated. (Para 28 , 29) |
| 5. writ petition allowed; decision made without costs. (Para 33 , 34) |
JUDGMENT :
ANIRUDDHA ROY, J.
Facts:
1. The petitioner participated in the recruitment process for Constable (GD) in Central Armed Police Forces (in short “CAPFs”) SSF and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles Examination for the year 2024.
2. The petitioner after having qualified the initial stages of the said examination was medically examined in the Detail Medical Examination (in short, “DME”). The petitioner was declared unfit due to the left arm “carrying angle” being less than 10 degree.
3. The petitioner applied for Review Medical Examination (in short “RME”). At the RME Board, after considering the X-Ray, it was found that the “carrying angle” in right elbow joint being 8 degree and in left elbow
The right to employment is a constitutional guarantee that must be upheld, ensuring candidates are treated fairly in recruitment processes.
Conflicting medical fitness opinions from government hospitals entitle merit-selected candidate to fresh independent re-examination, despite initial and review unfitness, without impugning medical bo....
Where appointment order has been issued and the petitioner had accepted the same by reporting for duty, subsequent medical examination report cannot make the petitioner ineligible for appointment.
The opinion of a competent Medical Board is crucial in determining the fitness of a candidate for appointment to a post, and the appointing authority ought to reconsider its earlier decision in light....
Judicial review of medical examination decisions in recruitment is limited to procedural adherence and significant discrepancies, with higher fitness standards for disciplined forces.
The opinion of the medical experts of the appointing authority shall prevail, and the parameters of fitness and required standards for appointment in the Indian Navy cannot be judicially reviewed.
Recruitment - Medically unfit - Prima-facie visual impression that the internal malleolar distance is more than the 05 cm scale, which is the cause of rejection of the candidature.
Conflicting medical opinions from review board at same hospital (within days) and subsequent independent government hospital warrant fresh medical examination by different board for fairness to provi....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
