SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Del) 2795

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, PRATIBHA RANI
Dalbir – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Harsh Vardhan Sharma, Mr. Prashant Chandra
For the Respondents: Mr. Jagjit Singh, Mr. Preet Singh, Mr. Kiran Kaushik

JUDGMENT :

Pradeep Nandrajog, J.

1. The writ petitioners of the above captioned petitions except Dharmender Kumar the writ petitioner of WP(C) No.8092/2015 have admittedly undergone surgical correction of eye sight by a process commonly known as Lasik surgery. Post surgery the distal and near vision is as per the prescribed standards without using any external aid i.e. specs. All of them have been denied employment on the ground that the medical standards prescribed require the distal and near vision to be as per the prescribed standard sans any correction surgery. The writ petitioners of all writ petitions were detected with either distal or near vision problem when they were medically examined and each undertook a Lasik surgery to correct the medical infirmity detected in them. Dharmender Kumar the writ petitioner of WP(C) No.8092/2015 disputes that he has undergone Lasik surgery and the dispute in said writ petition is whether his corrective eye vision is on account of Lasik surgery.

2. The writ petitioners of WP(C) 5105/2015 and WP(C) 3214/2015 claim employment as constables


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top