Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Asha Menon, JJ.
Abhimanyu Mor - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 11243 of 2020
Decided On : 06-01-2021
Important Points
Subject
Administrative Law - Military Law
Headnote
(B) Discretionary Authority - The court held that the direction to conduct a Review Medical Board is not a matter of right but of discretion based on prevailing circumstances. (Paras 4-5)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner was found unfit for service due to a kidney ailment by the Appeal Medical Board, but subsequent medical examinations from higher-ranking hospitals reported no such findings.
Findings of Court:
The court ordered the holding of a Review Medical Board to reassess the petitioner's fitness based on new medical evidence.
Issues: The primary issue was whether the petitioner had a right to a Review Medical Board after declared unfit for service.
Ratio Decidendi: The court agreed that while the Review Medical Board's establishment is discretionary, the contradictory findings from reputable medical institutions warranted a review.
Result: The writ petition was disposed of with a directive to hold a Review Medical Board.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to decision of medical board (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner examined by hospitals post amb (Para 2) |
| 3. rmb not a right; discretion involved (Para 3) |
| 4. court directs rmb due to contradictory findings (Para 4 , 5) |
| 5. possible reinstatement if fit (Para 6) |
| 6. writ petition disposed with directions (Para 7 , 8) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--By way of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the decision of the DGAFMS declining to hold Review Medical Board (RMB) against the decision of the Appeal Medical Board (AMB), which has found him unfit for service on account of kidney ailment `Right Renal Calculus'.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that after the decision of the AMB, the petitioner was examined by two super specialty hospital, one of which was Army's own prestigious Base Hospital, Delhi Cantt. and these hospitals did not find any evidence of the ailment found by the AMB.
3. Mr.Anurag Ahluwalia, Advocate for the respondents states that the RMB is not a matter of right and as it is presided over by Lieutenant General rank medical officer, the same should be resorted to in very rare cases. He also states that in the present case, stones in the kidney of the petitioner were found in two separate service hospitals' ultra sound reports. He also states that the possibility of the petitioner having undergone surgery for removal of renal stone after the AMB on 4th November, 2020 cannot be ruled out.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is in agreement with the submissions of learned counsel for the respondent that a direction to hold RMB is not a matter of right but a matter of discretion. However, in the present case as two super specialty hospitals, including the Army's own prestigious Base Hospital, Delhi Cantt., have not found any evidence of `Right Renal Calculus' in the petitioner, this Court directs holding of a RMB to review the medical condition of the petitioner within ten days.
5. It is clarified that this order has been passed in the peculiar facts of the present case inasmuch as there is contrary medical opinion from the Army's own Base Hospital, Delhi Cantt.
6. In the event, the petitioner is found fit, he shall be allowed to join the Officers Training Academy NCC (Special) Entry-48 Course.
7. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of.
8. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be also forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail.
