Point of Law: When the experts in field have opined against the petitioners, the Court would not be justified in sitting over as an appellate authority against the opinion formed by the experts.

ORDER :

The instant petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:-

(a) That the findings of the Detailed Medical Examination (DME) and Review Medical Examination (RME) Board, Annexure P-6, may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(b) That the findings given by the Cardiologist, Associate Professor, Department of Cardiology, IGMC, Shimla, with respect to the medical fitness of the petitioner for the post of Constable (Driver) ITBP may kindly be taken into consideration and accepted; or

(c) Alternatively, if the relief as sought for in clause (b) of the relief clause, supra refused, the respondents may kindly be directed to constitute the independent medical board for the medical examination of petitioner and to look into his medical fitness for the post of Constable (Driver) ITBP afresh.

(d) That if the relief sought for in sub-clause (a) and (b) of the relief clause supra accepted in that event the respondents may be directed to consider the case of petitioner for the appointment of post of Constable (Driver) as detailed in the petition.

2. The respondents vide its advertisement dated 23.01.2018 invited online applications for the post of Constable (Driver). The petitioner participated in the same and after qualifying the Physical Standard Test/Physical Efficiency Test was shortlisted for a Detailed Medical Examination (for short 'DME'). The petitioner appeared for the DME on 17.09.2021, however, his candidature was rejected on medical ground of Hypertension and Tachycardia against which the petitioner applied before the Review Medical Examination (for short 'RME'). The request of the petitioner was acceded to as per the guidelines for the Review Medical Examination (RME) issued vide Office Memorandum dated 31.05.2021 and the Review Medical Examination was conducted on 22.09.2021, wherein again it was declared that the petitioner was unfit for being appointed to the post of Constable (Driver) on the ground of Hypertension and Tachycardia and Dyslipidemia. However, the petitioner thereafter sought independent medical opinion from the IGMC, Shimla, in which it was opined that the petitioner was medically fit to hold the post in question.

3. When the case came up before the Court on 26.04.2022, the Court after hearing the parties passed the following order:-

The instant petition has been by the petitioner for grant of the following substantive reliefs:-

“(a) That the findings of the Detailed Medical Examination (DME) and Review Medical Examination (RME) Board, Annexure P-6, may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(b) That the findings given by the Cardiologist Associate Professor, Department of Cardiology, IGMC, Shimla with respect to the medical fitness of the petitioner for the post of constable (driver) ITBP may kindly be taken into consideration and accepted; or

(c) Alternatively, if the relief as sought for in clause (b) of the relief clause supra refused the respondents may kindly be directed to constitute the independent medical board for the medical examination of petitioner and to look into his medical fitness for the post of Constable (driver) ITBP afresh.

(d) That if the relief sought for in sub-clause (a) and (b) of relief clause supra accepted, in that event the respondents may be directed to consider the case of petitioner for the appointment of post of Constable (driver) as detailed in the petition.”The parties are ad idem that as far as the candidates, whose candidature had been rejected on the ground of hypertension/tachycardia, are concerned, those candidates are first required to be admitted/hospitalized by the Medical Board before a final opinion is given regarding the candidate’s fitness, as provided in the latest guidelines issued by the respondents vide Office Memorandum dated 31.05.2021 (Annexure P-8).

The reply filed by the respondents is conspicuously silent on this aspect of the matter, even though, the respondents would maintain that they have followed the due procedure in its letter and spirit.

T