Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Hirak Jyoti Bordoloi S/o Late Junmoni Brodoloi – Appellant
Versus
Union of India Rep. 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 Mr. S. S. Roy, the learned CGC, who appears on behalf of the respondents.
2. The present writ proceeding is filed challenging the opinion rendered in the Review Medical Examination Report of the Addl. RME Board, CT/GD-2025, GC CRPF, Guwahati 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 01.12.2025 concluded that the petitioner was unfit due to knock knee.
4. It is the further case of the petitioner that the petitioner thereupon carried out certain examination at the Gauhati Medical College & Hospital, Guwahati and it is the case of the petitione
The court cannot exercise jurisdiction to reevaluate varied medical opinions in recruitment matters and advises representation to the Review Medical Board for reconsideration.
The court cannot substitute its view for medical determinations made by competent boards, emphasizing the importance of procedural compliance for reconsideration.
Judicial review under Article 226 cannot substitute medical opinions unless grounded in irrationality or malice; petitioners are encouraged to pursue reevaluation through proper channels.
Judicial review of medical fitness decisions requires deference to specialized medical assessments; courts cannot intervene without proper procedural adherence.
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 review medical opinions in recruitment cases under Article 226 without prior representations to the concerned authorities.
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 intervene in medical fitness evaluations from established boards unless compelling evidence exists, upholding the integrity of medical assessments.
Court cannot review medical opinions from authorities; petitioners must seek reconsideration through appropriate representations.
Judicial review under Article 226 does not permit courts to override medical decisions; procedural compliance is required before approaching the court.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
