Termination of services based on medical unfitness is valid if supported by competent medical opinions, emphasizing the authority of medical assessments in employment law.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. The present petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing of order dated 05.09.2022 and notice dated 13.09.2022, terminating his services on expiry of completion of one month from the date on which the notice is served upon him, i.e. 15.09.2022.

2. According to petitioner, he was recruited on the post of Sepoy in the Indian Army on 02.04.2005 and during the course of his training, he had suffered stress fracture in his tibia. In the year 2016, petitioner had joined the services of CISF on the post of Assistant Sub Inspector. Again, in the year 2018, the petitioner had applied for the post of Assistant Commandant in CAPF under the Ex Servicemen Category. Petitioner claims to have cleared the written examination, however, in his medical examination he was declared medically unfit due to "left tibia on history and documentation". Aggrieved against his rejection in medical examination, petitioner claims to have preferred an appeal and based upon his medical reports and the review medical report dated 10.05.2019, he was called for interview on 24.07.2019 and was declared medically fit. Thereafter, in the final result declared on 02.08.2019, petitioner was declared as selected for the post in question.

3. The petitioner had averred that he was issued appointment letter on 23.09.2020 for joining on the post of Assistant Commandant under Ex Servicemen quota and in terms thereof, petitioner had tendered his acceptance on 01.10.2020 and reported for training on 12.10.2020. Petitioner further claims that while undergoing his training and playing football in the sports period, he injured his left knee and he reported to the medical hospital in the training institute on 16.11.2020. Thereafter upon referral, petitioner went to Artemis Hospital, Gurgaon on 17.11.2020 and Sports Injury Centre at Safdarjung Hospital on 01.12.2020 for medical tests and treatment.

4. It is further pleaded by the petitioner that a Court of Inquiry was conducted in February, 2021, wherein it was declared that "no one was responsible for injury of the petitioner and it was aggravated to the service". The petitioner also claims to have fulfilled his official obligations, training and medical tests till 30.04.2022. However, petitioner's services were terminated vide order dated 12.07.2022 by the respondent.

5. During the course of hearing, learned counsel submits that petitioner had made representations dated 05.08.2022 and 13.08.2022 to the Director General of CRPF, however, their fate is not known. Learned counsel next submits that petitioner had got himself examined at the Sports Injury Centre in Safdarjung Hospital on 13.08.2022, where he was declared fit. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that as per medical certificates dated 08.02.2022; 16.04.2022; 20.04.2022 and 13.08.2022, petitioner was declared medically fit, however, his services have been terminated despite there being no physical unfitness. So, petitioner had preferred a writ petition [W.P.(C) No. 11953/2022] seeking quashing of impugned order dated 12.07.2022 and the said petition was disposed of vide order dated 18.08.2022 directing the respondents to decide petitioner's representation. Thereafter, vide order dated 05.09.2022, the respondents rejected petitioner's representation in an arbitrary and fallacious manner.

6. Upon hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of material placed before us, we find that the relevant para of impugned order dated 05.09.2022, rejecting petitioner's representation dated 13.08.2022, reads as under:

"As per the directions of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, the representation