Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SOUMITRA SAIKIA
Umesh Koiri, S/o. Mahendra Koiri – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India, Represented By The Secretary To The Ministry Of Home Affairs – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. establishment of factual background and medical rejection history. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. mandatory reconciliation of contradictory professional medical opinions. (Para 4) |
| 3. formal disposal of the writ petition. (Para 5) |
JUDGMENT :
SOUMITRA SAIKIA, J.
Heard Mr. H.R. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.S Roy, learned CGC for the respondents.
2. The petitioner, in response to the advertisement dated 05.09.2024 issued by the Staff Selection Commission, applied for the recruitment to the post of Constable (GD) in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), SSF, and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles and Sepoy in Narcotics Control Bureau Examination for the year-2025. The petitioner claims to assert eligibility for the post, thus participating in the recruitment process. The petitioner was declared successful in both the Computer Based Test as well as the Physical Standard Test (PST)/ Physical Efficiency Test (PET). However, during the Medical Examinations, i.e. Detailed Medical Examination, he was found unfit on the following grounds:
(i) Fungal dermatitis both buttocks and (ii) Reddish discoloration of skin right side chest.
3. Subsequently, the petitioner app
When medical boards reject candidates based on conditions not clearly disqualifying under guidelines, and where conflicting medical opinions exist, the board must provide specific findings justifying....
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.
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.
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
