Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Pratima K. Gupta, Judicial Member, Chhabilendra Roul, Administrative Member
Prabhat Pandey – Appellant
Versus
Staff Selection Commission – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant provisionally selected but declared unfit due to stammering. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. contradictory government hospital report challenges unfitness finding. (Para 4) |
| 3. no provision for re-medical; expert opinion final; rules cannot change post-exam. (Para 5) |
| 4. review board at same hospital defeats purpose; fresh independent exam directed. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. fresh medical exam ordered; conditional appointment if fit. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon’ble Mrs. Pratima K. Gupta, Member (J)
At the outset, Ms. Neha Bairagee with Mr. Jagdish N., who has appeared on behalf of the SSC, states that in view of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed between SSC and Delhi police, the instant OA would be defended by the counsel representing Delhi Police. Accordingly, learned counsel for Respondents No. 3, Mr.Amit Yadav, shall represent Respondent No. 1 and 2 as well.
2. Factual matrix, as explained by the learned counsel for the applicant, is that the applicant has participated in the recruitment process initiated by the SSC, for the post of Constable (Executive) Male and Female in Delhi Police Examination, 2023. After having been successfully cleared the said examination, na
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
