SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 9675

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Manish Garg, Member (J), Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)
Vivek Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A./197/2021



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Ajesh Luthra
For the Respondents: Mr. Amit Yadav, Mr. J.P.Tiwari

Subsequent medical standard amendments post-advertisement cannot disqualify serving candidates eligible under original rules.

Headnote:The relevant medical standards under Rule 7 of Delhi Police (Appointment & Recruitment) Rules, 1980 (as amended in 2013) required minimum distant vision of 6/6 and 6/9 without correction, absence of physical defects interfering with duties, with no explicit disqualification for LASIK surgery prior to 2018 amendment. Applicant, a serving departmental constable, underwent LASIK surgery, qualified selection process for Sub-Inspector post advertised in 2018, but was declared unfit via report dated 26.11.2020 due to refractive surgery in right eye. Court found no distinct medical standards between constable and Sub-Inspector roles, applicant performed duties without hindrance post-surgery, and rejection based on post-closing date amendment was discriminatory. Key issue: Whether LASIK surgery disqualifies departmental candidates when not barred under rules applicable at advertisement/closing date (02.04.2018), and amendment dated 22.10.2018 cannot retrospectively apply. Ratio: Serving employees cleared initial medicals cannot be disqualified under subsequently amended standards not notified before process closure; prior Tribunal decisions in similar recruitments directed appointments disregarding LASIK findings where standards identical and no specific exclusion existed. Impugned medical unfitness order quashed; respondents directed to consider applicant for Sub-Inspector post under prevailing rules at initial engagement, conduct fresh medical if needed, and appoint with consequential benefits if eligible.

Table of Content
1. reliefs sought against lasik disqualification under 2018 rules. (Para 1 , 2)
2. respondents defend amended standards and lasik risks. (Para 3)
3. serving status and prior clearance override new disqualifications. (Para 4 , 5)
4. quash rejection; direct consideration and appointment. (Para 6)

ORDER

By Hon’ble Manish Garg, Member (J)

In the instant OA, the applicant seeks the following reliefs:-

"a) Quash and set aside the impugned medical report/ unfitness report dated 26.11.2020 (ANNEXURE-A/1) excluding the Applicant from the selection process to the post of Sub-Inspector in Delhi Police on the ground of "Refractive Surgery done in right eye" and direct the Respondents to treat the Applicant as medically fit and/or

b) Direct the Respondents/Staff Selection Commission to ignore the aforesaid reports and further consider the Applicant and appoint him to the post of Sub- Inspector in Delhi Police in accordance with his merit position and with all consequential benefits.

c) If need be for grant of prayer(s) made above, quash and set aside impugned notification dated 22.10.2018 (ANNEXURE- A/2) whereby Respondents have amended the Rules and incorporated disqualification of candidates on the ground of Surgery towards improvement of eye sight i.e. LASIK.

d) Accord all consequential benefits

e) Award costs of the proceedings; and

f) Pass any other order/direction which this Hon’ble Tribunal deem fit and proper in favour of the Applicant and against the Respondent in the facts and circumstances of the case."

2. The facts narrated by the learned counsel for the applicant are as under :-

2.1 An advertisement notice for the post of Sub Inspector in Delhi Police, CAPFs and Asstt. Sub Inspector in CISF Examination – 2018 was issued on 03.03.2018. Subsequent to the advertisement, an addendum was issued on 02.04.2018 whereby 123 departmental vacancies of Sub-Inspector (Exe.) (Male) in Delhi Police, which are required to be filled up by departmental candidates amongst Constables, Head Constables and Asstt. Sub-Inspector with minimum 3 years of services and less than 30 years of age were included. The operative portion of the said addendum reads as under:-

"3. The Commission has now decided to also include 123 vacancies (SC-19, ST-08, OBC-33 & UR-63) of departmental candidates reported by the Delhi Police for the post of Sub- Inspector (Executive) - Male in Delhi Police in the above said examination. The direct recruitment of Sub-Inspector for departmental candidates in Delhi Police will be made as per Rule-7 and 27-A of Delhi Police (Appointment & Recruitment), Rules 1980 (Amended in the year, 2013) and Standing Order No. 321/2013."

2.2 The amended rules came into force vide notification dated 13.03.2013, wherein the relevant portion of Medical Standard reads as under:-

"7. Medical Standard

(i) The minimum distant vision should be 6/6 and 6/9 of both eyes without correction, i.e., without wearing of glasses.

(ii) The candidates must not have knock knee, flat foot, varicose vein or squint in eyes and they should possess high colour vision.

(iii) They must be in good mental and bodily health and free from any physical defect likely to interfere with the efficient performance of the duties."

2.3 Learned counsel for the applicant would contend that there was no stipulation qua disqualification or rejection of candidature on the ground of Lasik surgery. He draws reference to Standing Order No. 321/2013 dated 14.03.2013, wherein the medical standard is same as that of the amended rules vide notification dated 13.03.2013.

2.4 Learned counsel for the applicant would further rely upon the decision rendered by this Tribunal in the matter of Abhishek Yadav vs. SSC and Anr. in OA No. 3209/2018 dated 02.09.2019.

The operative portion of the said order reads as under:-

"2. The applicant herein applied for the same recruitment process and qualified successfully in the written examination, Physical Endurance Test and Physical Standard Test on 23.10.2017 and as per

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top