JUDGMENT :

Sanjeev Kumar, J.-The Indian Navy issued an advertisement published in various newspapers in the month of December, 2015, inviting applications for recruitment of Artificer Apprentice (AA)-140 Batch. The advertisement notification, inter alia, laid down the selection procedure in para 16 (h). The required medical standard and criteria for recruitment was also clearly stated. The petitioner applied for the said post and qualified the written examination as well as physical fitness test held at Naval Recruitment Centre, Jammu. The Recruitment Medical examination of the petitioner was conducted by the Recruitment Medical Officer at the Centre itself. The petitioner was declared temporarily unfit for ‘DNS – Lt Side Blocked’ in the Recruitment Medical Examination which was provisional in nature. He was directed to report to Military Hospital, Jammu within 21 days for conduct of appeal Medical Examination. The preliminary medical examination was conducted at Military Hospital Jammu where he was declared fit for the referred disability. The petitioner along with other selected candidates, who had been declared medically fit in the preliminary medical examination, were directed to report at INS Chilka for final enrolment medicals.

2. The medical examination of the petitioner was conducted by the medical experts at INS Chilka as per the rules and regulations of the Navy. The petitioner was declared temporary unfit for ‘Color blindness’. The petitioner was thereafter referred for review of his disability for second time by Specialist Medical officer of Indian Naval Hospital Ship, Nivarini where he was finally declared unfit for ‘CP-IV by Ishihara’, and was, accordingly, not recruited.

3. The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 11.08.2016 issued by the Recruitment Officer whereby the petitioner has been informed that he has been found unfit for enrolment into the Navy due to his disability i.e. ‘CP-IV by Ishihara’.

4. The petitioner in this petition prays for a direction to the respondents to conduct the Review Medical Board for examination of the petitioner or refer him to some independent Board/Agency, as he does not suffer from any disability and is fit for enrolment into the Indian Navy.

5. The petitioner has mainly relied upon a medical fitness certificate dated 23.08.2016 issued by the Registrar, Department of Ophthalmology, Government Medical College, Jammu, wherein the Registrar has pointed out that the petitioner is fit for enrolment in Indian Navy and there appears to be an error of judgment made by the medical authority of the respondents. There is also a medical fitness certificate issued by Government Hospital, Sarwal, declaring the petitioner fit for service in Indian Navy, placed on record by the petitioner along with his petition.

6. Mrs. Surinder Kour, learned senior counsel, appearing for the petitioner vehemently argues that in view of the contrary opinion expressed by the Civil medical authorities, it was incumbent upon the respondents to convene a Review Medical Board for medical examination of the petitioner afresh or the respondents should have referred the petitioner to some independent Medical Board for re-examination. She submits that the respondents did not act as per the mandate of the law and acting mechanically and without any application of mind declared him unfit for the job. She also points out discrepancies by the Board of Medical Experts of the respondents by urging that in the Medical Examination report prepared by the respondents, the doctors, who examined the petitioner, have not mentioned the clinical procedure which they followed in reaching a conclusion that petitioner was suffering from CP-IV by Ishihara and is unfit for service in Indian Navy.

7. Per Contra, the respondents in their objections have relied upon the selection procedure and required medical standards and criteria for recruitment of candidates as Artificer Apprentice detailed in the advertisement notification.

8. M