Hon'ble KAUR, J.—The petitioner is presently a patient of the chronic kidney disease and is on Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis (for brevity herein after referred to CAPD).

2. The petitioner through the present petition is assailing the validity and propriety of the Medical Examination report dated 07.11.2013 and a letter dated 07.11.2013; vide which the petitioner was not allowed to join the services in the respondent bank as Probationary Officer. It is submitted that the impugned Medical report was prepared for a pre-recruitment Medical Examination which was conducted by the Respondent Bank, whereby the petitioner was declared as “unfit at present” to join the duties as Probationary Officer.

3. Thus, the question that arises to be considered by this Court is as to whether a person who is otherwise fully qualified for a post can be denied employment on the ground of his medical condition.

4. The petitioner has completed his academic qualification and possesses the degrees in B.C.A. and M.C.A. (Hons.) with specilization in Computer Applications securing 75.22% and 72% respectively completed in the year 2010 and 2013. Finding himself fit for carrying on the normal work routine, he applied for the Common written examination for recruitment of probationary officers/management trainees in public sector banks. The petitioner cleared the written examination and the interview conducted in pursuance of the recruitment process for the post of the Probationary Officer. After qualifying the written examination and interview, the petitioner vide appointment letter dated 23.3.2013 was appointed as the Probationary Officer in the respondent bank. The petitioner requested the respondent bank to extend the time of joining as he was trying to get his kidney transplant. Time to join duty was granted by a period of six months but due to certain circumstances, the transplantation was delayed and the same could not be carried out. The petitioner is presently required to wait for another date of transplantation. Actually, the delay was due to the non-availability of the donor. His mother has already given one kidney to her daughter i.e. the sister of the petitioner. His father has different blood group and because of other minute factors, he is not eligible donor under the Organs Act. In the absence of any eligible blood relative donor, the only option is to wait for the availability at the registered centre. The petitioner has availed this option by getting himself registered at MIOT Hospital, Chennai in June, 2013 itself.

5. The petitioner accordingly informed the respondent bank vide his letter dated 30.10.2013 that he was trying his level best to get the kidney transplant done; although, until the transplant took place, the petitioner is on CAPD. It was informed by him that the petitioner is fit to carry out the normal banking duties while he is on CAPD. Along with the said letter dated 30.10.2013, the petitioner enclosed his fitness certificates issued from,-

(a) Medical Superintendent, Nehru Hospital PGI Chandigarh,

(b) Dr. Mayank Jain, Nephrologist, goyal Hospital, Jodhpur,

(c) Dr. Rajan Ravichandran Nephrologists (Director, Madras Institute of Nephrology), MIOT Hospitals, Chennai.

6. Copy of all the medical certificates issued by the above-named doctors are collectively placed by the petitioner on record as Annexure-9.

7. Thereafter, the respondent bank referred the petitioner to the pre-recruitment medical examination but was declared as medically unfit by the respondent bank's approved doctor who opined that petitioner at present is unfit to join the duties. On the basis of the said report, the respondent bank informed the petitioner that he has been declared as unfit to join the respondent bank and denied the appointment to him.

8. Learned counsel for the parties were heard at length.

9. As per the reference letter dated 6.11.2013, the bank was required to conduct all the pathological tests. No tests as listed were carried out by the appro

Click Here to Read the rest of this document