IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Saurabh Banerjee, JJ.
Gurbhinder Singh - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 13669 of 2022
Decided On : 21-09-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's medical examination outcome and process. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. court observations on petitioner's delay and implications. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. dismissal of the petition. (Para 8) |
1. Vide the present petition, petitioner is seeking setting aside of the result of Review Medical Examination of the petitioner for the post of Head Constable (General Duty), CISF and all subsequent acts/proceedings for selection and appointment to the post of Head Constable (General Duty), CISF pursuant to Notification No. DAVP 19113/11/0005/2122 conducted by respondent No.2; and directions to the respondent No.2 to conduct the Re-medical of the petitioner and possible recommendation accordingly.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had submitted his application dated 15.02.2022 and applied for the post in question through `Weight Lifting' as sports quota in 109 kg weight category through proper channel before the respondent No.2.
3. Thereafter, the respondents issued an admit card in the name of the petitioner for sports trial wherein the recruitment centre was assigned to the petitioner was Jawahar Lal Nehru Stadium and the date of recruitment was 28.06.2022. Petitioner was contesting for the trial of weightlifting in 109 kg weight category and in the said sports trial, the petitioner outshined and gave an enthralling performance. On 28.07.2022, the respondents issued a list of provisionally selected candidates for medical examination for the post in question. Accordingly, the petitioner was called for Detailed Medical Examination on 12.08.2022. For appearing in the said Detailed Medical Examination for the recruitment of meritorious sportsmen and women in CISF against sports quota-2021, an admit card was also provided to the petitioner. Accordingly, on 12.08.2022, the petitioner appeared for the Detailed Medical Examination wherein the petitioner was declared unfit by the respondent No.2 due to the reasons as under:
a) Left Tympanic Mebrane not visualize due to wax
b) Pilondial Sinus
c) Overweight
4. Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred a Review Medical Examination which was to be held on 16.08.2022. As per the Clause 7 (f) (vi) of the notification no. DAVP 19113/11/0005/2122 the candidates are only entitled to apply for the Review Medical Examination in a span of 24 hours only and no review medical examination forms would be accepted pursuant to the said deadline.
5. It is further stated in the present petition that the Review Medical Examination was supposed to happen on 16.08.2022, however due to numerous candidates participating in the Review Medical Examination, the Review Medical Examination of some candidates including the petitioner was postponed to 22.08.2022. Subsequently, on 22.08.2022, the Review Medical Examination of the petitioner was conducted wherein the board reviewed the medical examination and further declared the petitioner unfit due to only `Pilonidal Sinus' and `Overweight'.
6. Learned counsel for respondents who is appearing on advance notice has informed this Court that the selection process for the post in question has already been completed and subsequently, all vacancies have been filled-up. Learned counsel for respondents has further informed this Court that the training of the candidates appointed on the aforesaid post is going on since 05.09.2022.
7. In view of above, we find that the petitioner has approached this Court belatedly. Moreover, the petitioner was declared unfit by the Medical Board and the Review Medical Board. Thus, he has missed the bus.
8. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.
A candidate declared unfit in a medical examination for recruitment does not hold grounds to contest employment selection results, especially when approached belatedly after vacancies are filled.
Conflicting medical opinions can lead to the court directing a specific medical assessment to resolve the dispute.
The standards for medical fitness in recruitment processes set by law enforcement agencies are to be respected, and judicial intervention is limited to cases of clear injustice or bias.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner's medical fitness should be determined in accordance with the Revised Uniform Guidelines, and any doubts regarding the medical ....
The court affirmed the necessity of fair re-evaluation in recruitment processes when discrepancies in medical fitness findings arise.
The court affirmed the right to a fair assessment in recruitment processes, directing a further medical examination due to inconsistencies in initial evaluations.
The subsequent issuance of a fitness certificate did not negate the petitioner's medical unfitness at the time of examination.
Medical fitness evaluations must adhere to standardized guidelines to ensure fair assessments of candidates regarding weight and vision qualifications.
Conflicting medical reports and lack of conclusive evidence can lead to a court ordering re-examination to resolve discrepancies.
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.