Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
Jairaj Prajapat – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 35657/2021
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
WPC 11555/2021 & CM APPL. 35656/2021
1. Present writ petition has been filed seeking direction to the Respondents to re-examine and re-conduct medical test of the Petitioner under the supervision of an independent Medical Board having independent doctor or re-examine the Petitioner at R & R Hospital, New Delhi or AIIMS, New Delhi.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner had earlier preferred a writ petition challenging the arbitrary act of the Respondents in conducting the Appeal Medical Board and this Court vide order dated 1st September, 2021 had disposed of the petition with a direction to the Respondents to conduct a fresh medical examination by the Review Medical Board.
3. He states that the Petitioner duly appeared before Review Medical Board on 17th September 2021 where the attitude of the Respondents was hostile towards the Petitioner. He states that the Petitioner was then referred to AFCME where he was made to sit in a chilled air conditioned room from 10.00 am to 12.30 pm and thereafter immediately his B
The court evaluates the decision-making process, affirming that procedural fairness is paramount, while unsupported allegations of bias do not merit overturning of a medical assessment.
The Court emphasizes the evaluation of the decision-making process over the decision itself in administrative matters, confirming the adequacy of the medical re-examinations conducted.
The court examines the decision-making process and not the decision itself in matters of medical examination and found no further interference was called for in writ jurisdiction.
The court emphasized the need for a fair and thorough medical evaluation process for candidates applying for the post of Airmen in the Indian Air Force.
The court affirmed the necessity of conducting fair and thorough medical evaluations, rejecting arbitrary decisions in fitness assessments.
The requirement for hospitalization before giving a final opinion on a candidate's fitness as per the revised guidelines.
Non-compliance with guidelines for review in medical examination led to the rejection of the petitioner on the ground of hypertension without proper examination and hospitalization, resulting in the ....
Medical examination by the Medical Board consisting of medical experts under Rule 15(g) cannot be said to be inferior to the physical standard test conducted by a team of non-experts.
Non-compliance with medical examination guidelines renders the opinion of the Review Medical Board unacceptable.
Failure to follow guidelines for medical examination can lead to the setting aside of findings and the direction to constitute a fresh Review Medical Board.
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
