IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Saurabh Banerjee, JJ.
Prachi Kumari - Appellant
Versus
ITBP - Respondent
W.P.(C) 8386 of 2022
Decided On : 26-05-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conclusion and final order issued. (Para 1 , 2 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. petitioner's request for medical review. (Para 3 , 6) |
| 3. court's acceptance of respondent's notice. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. court's directive for re-examination. (Para 7) |
CM APPL. 25242/2022 (exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 8386/2022 & CM APPL. 25241/2022 (stay)
3. By way of the present writ petition, petitioner seeks following reliefs:
a) to set-aside the decision dated 02.05.2022 of the respondent No. 1 declaring the petitioner as Unfit:
b) to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to participate in the Documents Verification to be conducted:
c) to direct the respondent No.1 to place on record the medical record of the petitioner;
d) to direct the respondents to medically re-examine the petitioner within a time bound manner;
e) to direct the respondents to stay the process of recruitment until the present petition is disposed;
f) to direct the respondents to reserve seats for the petitioner in the merit list which may be prepared during the pendency of the present Petition;
g) to direct the respondents to subject the final result which may be declared to the outcome of the present petition.
4. Notice issued.
5. Learned Senior Panel Counsel for respondents accepts notice.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the Detailed Medical Examination, the petitioner was found as unfit due to Hazy B/L lower lobe with Prominent Vascular marking (? Covid Infection). Thereafter, the petitioner opted for Review of Medical Examination before the Review Medical Board of the respondent no. 1, which referred her to a laboratory named Focus Imaging and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. After her examination at the Focus Imaging and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd., Delhi, the petitioner was declared Covid negative. However, in the Review Medical Examination, based on a medical split opinion dated 01.05.2022, the petitioner was finally declared as unfit on the ground of Early Small airway obstruction.
7. Since, there are two different medical opinions and without going into the controversy, whether the petitioner is unfit or fit, we hereby direct the Incharge, R.R. Hospital to constitute a Medical Board to re-conduct the medical test of the petitioner within one week from today. The date of test shall be conveyed to the petitioner in advance, who shall appear before the said Medical Board on the date so fixed. It is made clear that if the petitioner is found medically fit by the Medical Board so constituted, she shall be allowed to join the selection process and in case, she is declared unfit, no further opportunity shall be granted to her and report of said Medical Board shall be considered final, since, the same have been admitted by the petitioner.
8. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition stands disposed of.
9. Pending application also stands disposed of.
10. Copy of this order be given dasti under signature of Court Master.
In cases of conflicting medical opinions regarding fitness, courts must ensure a fair process through re-examination to uphold the right to a just outcome.
The court mandates a fresh medical assessment for a candidate deemed unfit, affirming the importance of ensuring fairness in recruitment processes.
Recruitment processes require strict adherence to established medical evaluation guidelines, and expert opinion is essential in fitness determinations for service. Adverse decisions without proper ex....
Appointment - Respondents to facilitate the constitution of a Medical Board including pulmonary experts at the Army Hospital (R&R), New Delhi and also to facilitate the examination of the petitioner
The court affirmed the necessity of fair re-evaluation in recruitment processes when discrepancies in medical fitness findings arise.
Judicial review of medical fitness in recruitment must ensure fairness, allowing for independent assessment to determine eligibility.
The Appeal Medical Board's determination of medical unfitness prevails unless credible evidence of bias is presented; surgical corrections post-assessment do not automatically warrant re-evaluation.
The report of the specified hospital's medical examination shall be final and binding upon the parties, and the petitioner's appointment and adjustment will be based on the examination outcome.
When medical boards reject candidates based on conditions not clearly disqualifying under guidelines, and where conflicting medical opinions exist, the board must provide specific findings justifying....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.