IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Abdul Momin S/o Abdul Latif – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
1. Heard Mr. A.M. Khan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Ms. S. Baruah, the learned CGC, who appears on behalf of the respondents.
2. The present writ proceeding is filed challenging the opinion rendered by the Review Medical Examination Board-1 of the Centre-CAPFs, CH BSF, Patgaon wherein it was opined that the petitioner is unfit.
3. The materials on record show that in pursuance to a notice issued for recruitment of Constable (GD) in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) and SSF, Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles, and Sepoy in Narcotics Control Bureau Examination-2025, the petitioner participated in the said recruitment process. While carrying out the medical examination, it was found that the petitioner was not fit for appointment as a Constable (GD). The petitioner thereupon requested for a review. The Review Medical Board by the opinion rendered on 22.11.2025 also concluded that the petitioner was unfit on the ground of defective distant vision 6/9 both eyes.
4. It is the further case of the petitioner that the petitioner thereupon carried out certain examination at the Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed Medical College and Hospital, Bar
Court cannot review medical opinions from authorities; petitioners must seek reconsideration through appropriate representations.
The court cannot intervene in medical fitness evaluations from established boards unless compelling evidence exists, upholding the integrity of medical assessments.
Judicial review under Article 226 cannot substitute medical opinions unless grounded in irrationality or malice; petitioners are encouraged to pursue reevaluation through proper channels.
A court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot interfere with medical opinions rendered by competent authorities unless there is a gross error or illegality in their assessment.
The court cannot substitute its view for medical determinations made by competent boards, emphasizing the importance of procedural compliance for reconsideration.
Judicial review of medical fitness decisions requires deference to specialized medical assessments; courts cannot intervene without proper procedural adherence.
The court lacks jurisdiction to review specialized medical opinions regarding fitness for recruitment and encourages petitioners to seek reconsideration through proper channels.
The Court cannot review medical opinions in recruitment cases under Article 226 without prior representations to the concerned authorities.
Point of law: No good reason to discard joint opinion by three eye specialists merely because other eye-specialists on civilian side had given a different opinion to effect that there was no defect i....
The court reinforced that it cannot overturn medical opinions in recruitment processes and allowed for further representation for reconsideration before the Review Medical Board.
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.