Hon’ble V.K. Shukla, J.—In this bunch of writ petitions, the petitioners, who have been declared successful at the recruitment examination conducted by the U.P. Police Recruitment & Promotion Board, Lucknow (herein after referred to as “the Board”) for appointment on the post of constables in civil police, have approached this Court, challenging the order of the Board, wherein they have been declared medically unfit by the Regional Medical Board constituted at the Training Centres, whereas some of the petitioners have approached this Court on mere asking to appear before the Regional Medical Board constituted at the Training Centres for medical examination.

2. Factual situation which emerges in this bunch of writ petitions is that an advertisement dated 10.08.2009 was issued by the U.P. Police Recruitment & Promotion Board for recruitment on the post of constables in U.P. Civil Police, in pursuance of which the petitioners claim to have applied for consideration of their candidature. They appeared at the recruitment centres, undertook physical test and cleared medical test. Thereafter the petitioners were asked to undertake written examination, and on the merit status secured by them in the written test, their names were published. Petitioners claim that after selection had been made, they were asked to report at the respective Regional Training Centres, where they were supposed to produce their educational certificates, caste certificates and residence certificates. Petitioners claim that at the said point of time, without there being any authorization and without any order from the Police Establishment Board, Head Quarter, Allahabad, petitioners were further medically tested and have been declared unfit, and based on the same, they have been prevented from completing training, whereas in some of writ petitions petitioners have rushed to this Court resisting second medical examination. At this juncture, petitioners have rushed to this Court, complaining therein that under the U.P. (Civil Police) Constable and Head Constable Service Rules, 2008, there is no provision for re-examination by the Medical Board, whereas in the past, petitioners had already been declared medically fit, inasmuch as, there is no reason for the Training Centres to conduct fresh medical examination.

3. In respect of controversy involved in writ petitions, this Court had earlier asked the learned standing counsel to produce relevant records. Relevant records have been produced, as such with the consent of the parties; this bunch of writ petitions has been taken up for final hearing and disposal.

4. Sri Sanjay Kumar, Sri Vijay Gautam, Sri Satya Prakash, Sri Rahul Sripat, Sri Ram Chandra Srivastava and Sri V.K. Singh, Advocates, representing the petitioners, contended with vehemence that entire exercise undertaken by the respondents for holding medical examination at the training Centres is totally without jurisdiction, in such a situation and in this background, declaration of petitioners being medically unfit in the garb of re-medical examination at the Training Centres is beyond the Rules, and the action taken is unjustifiable. Alternatively, it has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that infirmities, which have been pointed out, are not at all suffered by the petitioners and in very arbitrary manner, the petitioners have been declared medically unfit, and if at all re-medical examination is necessary, the petitioners are prepared to undergo second medical examination and said opportunity be provided to them.

5. Countering the said submissions, Sri Piyush Shukla, learned standing counsel, representing the respondents, on the other hand, contended that the incumbents, who are to be enrolled in police force, have to be medically and physically fit, and once it has been found that the petitioners are medically unfit, then they cannot be permitted to claim as a matter of right to be there as members of police force. It has also been