Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
RAJNESH OSWAL, J.
Zakir Hussain – Appellant
Versus
Union of India and ors. – Respondent
WP (C) No. 2799 of 2024 c/w CCP (S) No. 459 of 2024 WP(C) No. 3077 of 2024
Decided on : 05-03-2025
(A) Recruitment to the post of Constable (GD) in Central Armed Police Forces - Medical fitness - Petitioner initially declared unfit due to squint and polydactyly, but later declared fit after review - Court directed respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment and issue order if in merit list. (Paras 1-8)
(B) Judicial review - The court emphasized the importance of adhering to medical examination guidelines and ensuring timely resolution of recruitment disputes. (Paras 3, 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to quash the results of medical examinations declaring him unfit for recruitment, later declared fit after a review.
Issues: The main issue was the medical fitness of the petitioner for recruitment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that since the petitioner was declared fit in the review examination and a post was reserved for him, there was no impediment to his appointment.
Result: Both petitions disposed of.
ORDER :
1. Initially, the petitioner had filed a petition bearing WP(C) No.2799/2024, whereby the petitioner had sought quashing of the results of the Detailed Medical Examination (DME) dated 29.10.2024 and the Review Medical Examination (RME) dated 05.11.2024, whereby the petitioner was declared unfit for the recruitment to the post of Constable (GD) in Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), SSF and Rifleman (GD) advertised vide Notification No. PPI03/17/2023-PP dated 24.11.2023. Further prayer was made for directing the respondents to declare the petitioner as fit and select him for the post of Constable (GD) in Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), SSF, and Rifleman (GD).
2. The respondents had filed the response stating therein that in the Detailed Medical Examination dated 29.11.2024, the petitioner was declared unfit due to (i) Squint (B/L) (ii) Polydactyly ? Rt. little finger and during Review Medical Examination conducted on 05.11.2024, the petitioner was also declared unfit due to Polydactyly Rt. little finger deformity.
3. This Court vide order dated 27.11.2024 directed the respondents to undertake the review of the medical examination of the petitioner in accordance with the guidelines laid down in Office Memorandum dated31.05.2021 within a period of two weeks from today.
4. Before this could be done, the respondent No. 2 came out with the select list dated 30.12.2024 which prompted the petitioner to file another writ petition bearing WP(C) No.3077/2024 for quashing the select list dated 30.12.2024 issued by respondent No. 2 and yet again, a prayer was made for directing the respondents to select the petitioner for the above said post and this Court also vide order dated 01.01.2025 reserved one post of Constable (GD) in Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), SSF, and Rifleman (GD) for the petitioner.
5. The respondents have filed the response to that writ petition also, thereby reiterating the facts as narrated earlier in response to WP(C) No.2799/2024.
6. Mr. Vishal Sharma, learned DSGI has produced the Review Medical Examination report in compliance to the order dated 27.11.2024 and the perusal of the same reveals that during Review Medical Examination conducted on 15.02.2025, the petitioner has been declared fit.
7. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
8. As the controversy was only with regard to medical fitness of the petitioner and now as the official respondents have themselves declared the petitioner fit and one post has already been reserved vide order dated 01.01.2025 for the petitioner, this Court finds no impediment in directing the respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment to the post of Constable (GD) in Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), SSF and Rifleman (GD) advertised vide Notification No. PBI03/17/2023-PP dated 24.11.2023 and in the event, the petitioner figures in the merit list, the respondents are directed to issue the appointment order in his favour. It is made clear that entire exercise shall be completed by the respondents within a period of two months from the date copy of this order is made available to the respondents.
9. The record after perusal is returned to Mr. Vishal Sharma, DSGI.
10. In view of the above, both the petitions are disposed of
11. Consequently, the accompanied contempt petition is also disposed of.
The court ruled that once the petitioner was declared fit for recruitment, he should be considered for appointment to the post of Constable (GD).
The opinion of a competent Medical Board is crucial in determining the fitness of a candidate for appointment to a post, and the appointing authority ought to reconsider its earlier decision in light....
Conflicting medical opinions can lead to the court directing a specific medical assessment to resolve the dispute.
The court's decision was based on the petitioner being declared medically fit upon re-examination and the directive to the Staff Selection Commission to expedite the recruitment process.
Where appointment order has been issued and the petitioner had accepted the same by reporting for duty, subsequent medical examination report cannot make the petitioner ineligible for appointment.
The court has the authority to order a re-examination by an independent Medical Board and make decisions based on the findings of the re-examination.
Judicial review of medical fitness in recruitment must ensure fairness, allowing for independent assessment to determine eligibility.
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
