Back
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, MANOJ JAIN
Navdeep – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral)--Petitioner seeks setting aside of order dated 19.11.2019 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner for medical re-examination has been rejected.
2. Petitioner had participated in the recruitment process for the post of Constable in the Railway Protection Force in the year 2018-2019. Petitioner was found to be medically unfit and rejected on the ground "mark of Lasik flap positive on cornea".
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the order of the Supreme Court dated 10.05.2022 in Civil Appeal Nos.1270-1271/2022 titled Dalbir Etc. vs. Union of India & Ors. Etc. to contend that in similar circumstances, the Supreme Court had permitted petitioners therein who had undergone lasik surgery for being recruited in the Railway Protection Force.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Supreme Court had constituted a Committee and the Committee had opined that undergoing lasik would not be a disqualifying condition for recruitment in the Railway Protection Force.
5. We are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner for the reason that the Supreme Court in Dalbir vs. Union of India in its order da
The judgment of the Supreme Court declaring the benefit of undergoing lasik surgery to be applicable only prospectively and not available to people who had not agitated their rights, has no bearing o....
Subsequent medical standard amendments post-advertisement cannot disqualify serving candidates eligible under original rules.
A candidate's eligibility for employment should consider improvements in medical conditions occurring before the recruitment process concludes.
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
