The main legal point established is that the appointment was subject to medical fitness, and the court could not substitute the opinion of the Medical Board. The court also highlighted the limitations of its jurisdiction in assessing medical reports.

JUDGMENT

Jyoti Singh, J. (Oral)

1. Present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

"I. To pass appropriate order, direction or writ in nature certiorari to quash and set aside letter/communication of respondent No. 3 dated 28.03.2018 and that of her predecessor dated 20.11.2015.

II. To pass appropriate order, direction or writ in nature of mandamus to direct the restoration of the Appointment Letter dated 04.06.2014 with retrospective effect.

III. To pass appropriate order, direction or writ in nature of mandamus commanding the respondent to allow the petitioner to join his duties in accordance with the Appointment letter dated 04.06.2014.

IV. Cost of the petition."

2. Facts to the extent relevant and as averred in the writ petition are that Petitioner's father, late Shri M.C. Upadhyay, died on 17.06.2011, while serving Respondent No.1/Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as `IOCL'). Petitioner acquired a B.Tech. degree in Computer Sciences and his mother applied for his appointment on 08.08.2011 under `Scheme For Rehabilitation of The Family of The Officer Dying while in Service' read with Modification in the said Scheme (hereinafter referred to as `Rehabilitation Scheme'), pertaining to option R-3, of IOCL whereby she had to forego the Rehabilitation Grant equivalent to 60 months of Basic Pay, Stagnation Increment and Dearness Allowance of her late husband, in lieu of Petitioner's employment.

3. On 04.06.2014, IOCL issued an appointment letter after scrutiny of the qualifications of the Petitioner and interview on 13.01.2014 for assessing his overall suitability. Appointment was offered to the post of Junior Technical Assistant (JTA) Grade-III. As per terms of the appointment, appointment was subject to the Petitioner being found medically fit by IOCL's Medical Officer or by a Government Medical Officer of the status as specified therein. Petitioner accordingly got himself medically examined by the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) of the District Government Hospital, Meerut, where he was residing and was found `Fit' as per the medical report.

4. It is the case of the Petitioner that when he reported to the office of Respondent No.2 on 01.07.2014, there were three others who had reported for such appointments and submitted similar `Pre- Employment Examination Forms in Part-I, II, III & IV', however, while they were appointed, Petitioner was not. Petitioner was thereafter directed to appear before a Medical Board of private doctors of Kailash Hospital, Noida, and was declared `medically unfit' for employment and the appointment was cancelled vide letter dated 20.11.2015.

5. Dissatisfied with the medical report, Petitioner got himself examined at Fortis Hospital, NOIDA on 14.04.2016 and it was certified by the doctors that his kidney was functioning normally; he was on stable immunosuppression and blood pressure medicines and was medically and physically `fit' for any kind of activity. Armed with this certificate, Petitioner requested IOCL to restore the appointment, but failing to receive any positive response, he challenged the cancellation letter dated 20.11.2015 in W.P.(C) 1051/2018. Writ petition was disposed of by order dated 05.02.2018 giving liberty to the Petitioner to make a concise representation to IOCL and directing the Respondent therein to consider the representation in light of the medical certificate dated 14.04.2016 and further directing that if any vacancy was available in the post of JTA Grade-III, then his case be considered sympathetically.

6. Petitioner submitted a representation on 09.02.2018, which was rejected on 28.03.2018 on the ground that no vacancy existed in the post of JTA Grade-III, against which Petitioner's case could be considered for compassionate appointment. Laying a challenge to the said order dated 28.03.2018 and the earlier order dated 20.11.2015, Petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking restoration of the appointment letter d