The court upheld that military medical examination regulations must be followed, allowing the petitioner a chance for admission contingent on recovery verification.

JUDGMENT :

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:-

“(i) To quash the Impugned Order dated 03.12.2025 (ANNEXURE Pl).

(ii) To issue a writ directing the respondents to conduct the Review Medical Board of Petitioner, after expiry of recovery period, i.e. on 06.03.2026, and if found medically fit, to allow the petitioner to join NDA-155 Course immediately, OR in the next course, i.e. NDA-156 Course, commencing from 01.07.2026.”

2. The facts as noted from the petition are that pursuant to notification issued by the respondents on 11.12.2024 inviting applications to the National Defence Academy and the Naval Academy Examination (I)-2025, the petitioner applied for the NDA-155 Course. The petitioner had cleared both the written examination as well as the SSB interview and was called for medical examination for the NDA-155 Course between 08.09.2025 to 11.09.2025. During the medical examination, the petitioner was declared temporarily unfit due to the following reasons:-

i. Hydrocele Left

ii. Disc suspect in both eyes

iii. Substandard vision in both eyes

3. The case of the petitioner is that, being declared unfit, he had consulted specialists in Medanta Hospital, Gurugram and AIIMS, Delhi, who conducted comprehensive tests and confirmed that the medical condition of (i) Hydrocele Left and (ii) Disc suspect in both eyes is absolutely normal. His eye condition was also declared normal and fit for military service.

4. Further, during medical evaluation at Medanta Hospital, Gurugram, the petitioner was diagnosed with left indirect inguinal hernia and was advised to undergo Laparoscopic left inguinal Hernioplasty, which is a minor procedure, to oust any chance of unfitness, for the petitioner to be completely fit after 2 weeks of the procedure. Accordingly, the petitioner underwent Laparoscopic Hernioplasty procedure on 18.09.2025. On 10.10.2025, after medical examination of the petitioner, the specialist medical officer has issued the fitness certificate declaring the petitioner fit for all physical activities including strenuous activities.

5. The Appellate Medical Board of petitioner was immediately conducted within a month of surgery at the Base Hospital, Delhi to re-assess his medical condition by a specialist medical officer. Before commencement of medical exam, the candidate is required to fill some forms with a declaration about previous medical history pertaining to any surgery or any other medical procedure. The petitioner provided the details about the Laparoscopic Hernioplasty procedure carried out on 18.09.2025. During the Appeallate Medical Board, the petitioner was declared unfit for the following reasons:-

i. Hernioplasty healing period not completed

ii. Substandard vision both eyes (unfit only for AF -F)

6. The case of the petitioner is that insofar as the medical condition with respect to substandard vision in both eyes, the petitioner was found unfit for Air Force (Flying Duty). In other words, the petitioner was fit for ground duties in Air Force, which is the second preference of the petitioner. It follows that, on the basis of findings of Appellate Medical Board, the petitioner was otherwise found fit for Air Force (Ground Duty) but not at the time on account of ‘Hernioplasty Healing period not completed’. In other words, the petitioner was found unfit because the healing period was not completed.

7. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that in terms of paragraph 3.5.5 of Chapter-5 of lAP 4303, issued by DGMS (Air HQ), the healing period for Laparoscopic Hernioplasty is 24 weeks. He also relies upon a Notificatio