Conflicting medical reports warrant fresh independent re-examination for provisionally selected candidates.

ORDER (ORAL)

Hon’ble Ms Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (A)

The applicant participated in the selection process for the post of constable executive in Delhi Police. Despite his selection, he has not been given the offer of appointment as the medical examination followed by the Review Medical Examination has declared him unfit, on account of defective distance vision. The applicant ventilates his grievance in the present OA seeking the following relief:

“A. Call for records;

B. Quash and set aside the impugned order/report dated 20/01/2024;

C. Direct the Respondent No. 1 to constitute an independent medical board to medically re-examine the Applicant;

D. Direct the Respondents to appoint the Applicants in the post of Constable (Exe.) Male- in OBC category with all consequential benefits including arrears etc;

E. Award cost of the proceedings; and F. Pass any order/relief/direction(s) as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice in favour of the Applicant.”

2. Relying upon the pleadings contained in the OA learned counsel for the applicant points out that the applicant has also sought an independent opinion of the medical authority from a Government institution and according to the medical opinion furnished therein he has been declared fit in terms of the vision. Accordingly, in view of different medical opinions which are at variance with each other, he deserves a further opportunity for a fresh medical examination to determine his fitness.

3. Learned counsel further points out that this issue of medical fitness of candidates who had successfully participated in the selection examination in Delhi Police has engaged the attention of different benches of this Tribunal in a large number of OAs and in identical facts and circumstances the Tribunal has held that once there is a medical opinion on record which is contrary to the medical examination conducted by the respondents and it holds the applicant/candidate to be fit, he/she is deserving of a fresh opportunity of medical examination to determine his/her fitness. Learned counsel produces before us one such order dated 11.03.2024 passed in OA No. 670/2024.

4. Shri Amit Yadav, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the medical examination which is the subject of this OA is conducted for determining fitness to hold the particular Government post and not to determine the health standards of the person. Selection to an examination and the requirements of such selection is to be determined in accordance with rules and instructions governing the subject. In the instant case, there are detailed and elaborate guidelines which govern medical examination for appointment to the particular post. He further submits there are also provisions with respect to appeal against the opinion of the concerned medical board and in the instant case, the applicant should have exercised the option of appeal in accordance with rules. He specifically quotes from the provision with respect to appeals, the relevant extracts of which reads as under:

“Appeals against the findings of Medical Authority- In cases where a Government servant or a candidate for Government service is declared unfit for retention in Government service or for appointment in the Government service by an individual Medical Officer/Medical Board, as the case may be, the grounds for rejection may be communicated to him in broad terms without giving minute details regarding the defects pointed out by the Medical Officer/Medical Board. Cases, where the grounds of rejection have not been clearly stated by the Medical Board in their report, may be referred to the Health Ministry for advice.

Ordinarily ther