IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
Gaurav Baisoya - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 17612 of 2022
Decided On : 06-01-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition seeks independent medical examination. (Para 3) |
| 2. contradictory medical reports regarding fitness. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. request for specialist medical board examination. (Para 7) |
| 4. court orders specialist examination with binding report. (Para 8 , 10) |
| 5. petition and application disposed with finality. (Para 9 , 11) |
CM APPL.56340/2022 (exemption)
CM APPL.56341/2022 (exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2. The applications are disposed of.
W.P.(C) 17612/2022 & CM APPL.56339/2022 (for interim relief)
3. Vide the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions to the respondents to carry out the medical examination of the petitioner again from an independent board of doctors including the specialist doctors for further completion of the medical examination of the petitioner and to keep the post vacant till the disposal of the present writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner had applied for the post of Assistant Commandant in Coast Guard (Ministry of Defence). Petitioner qualified written test. Subsequently, on 20.08.2022, petitioner appeared before the Special Medical Board for medical examination and was declared unfit on account of "COMPLEX CYSTIC LESION RT KIDNEY". Thereafter, petitioner appeared before Appellate Medical Board on 12.10.2022 and was declared unfit on account of "RT PARAPELVIC CYST". On 03.11.2022, petitioner got examined himself at his own expenses at AIIMS, Delhi and his examination report is as under:
"Report
ULTRASOUND ABDOMEN
Liver: Normal in size and echo-texture. No focal lesion/IHBRD
Gall Bladder: Normal in wall thickness. No calculus seen. CBD/PV: Normal in calibre
Pancreas: Normal in bulk and echotexture. MPD not dilated
Spleen: Normal in size and echotexture. No focal lesion seen.
Bilateral Kidneys: Normal in size and echotexture. Nu calculus/Hydronephrosis seen. There is a well defined aneichoic lesion in pid-polar region of right kidney measuring 13.8 x 14.2 mm with regular margin with no e/o internal septations/calcification-s/o simple renal cyst
Urinary Bladder: Normal
No Free fluid seen
Impression:
Right simple renal conical cyst.
Diagnosis:
Right simple renal conical cyst."
5. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner was again declared unfit by the Review Medical Board on account of "A 14X16X15.3mm Bosniak II cyst mid pole right kidney" and the same was conveyed to the petitioner vide e-mail dated 16.12.2022 (Annexure P-1).
6. Further submitted that reports of Special Medical Board dated 20.08.2022, Appellate Medical Board dated 12.10.2022, Review Medical Board dated 16.12.2022 and AIIMS, Delhi dated 03.11.2022 are contradictory to each other.
7. Learned counsel for petitioner, on instructions, submits that let a specialist Board be constituted and petitioner be examined again.
8. In view of the above, without commenting on the opinion of the aforementioned reports, we hereby direct the In-charge of R&R Hospital, Delhi to constitute a Board of specialist doctors and examine the petitioner within three weeks from today.
9. It is agreed by the petitioner that the report of the R&R Hospital shall be final and binding and it will not be challenged further.
10. We hereby make it clear that in the report of R&R Hospital, Delhi, if the petitioner is found to be fit, he shall be allowed to join the selection process. However, if the report is negative then that will be final and binding upon the parties.
11. The petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending application also stands disposed of.
The court ordered an independent medical review for the petitioner, emphasizing that the findings would be binding, ensuring fairness in the selection process based on medical fitness.
The requirement for a specialist medical evaluation in selection processes is critical when previous assessments lack clarity or expert opinion.
The court mandated a competent Medical Board, emphasizing qualified evaluation for medical fitness in selection processes, reinforcing the importance of proper medical assessments in fundamental righ....
The decisions of a Review Medical Board in recruitment processes are final and can only be challenged under exceptional circumstances, such as procedural violations or malafides.
When the experts in field have opined against the petitioners, the Court would not be justified in sitting over as an appellate authority against the opinion formed by the experts.
The court affirmed that the assessment of fitness by a Medical Board is an expert determination, and interference in such matters should be approached with caution.
Judicial review of medical fitness in recruitment must ensure fairness, allowing for independent assessment to determine eligibility.
The court upheld that mere presence of keloids does not guarantee fitness for service; operational risks and examiners' expert opinions carry significant weight.
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.