##PAGE1## ##PAGE2## ##PAGE3## ##PAGE4##

4

Item No.92/ Court-IV O.A. No.1003/2024

leaving the applicant with no efficacious remedy except

to invoke the jurisdiction of this Tribunal by way of the

present Original Application.

2.2. Learned counsel also placed reliance upon the

decision rendered by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in

SSC & ors. vs. Gaurav Sharavat and anr. (W.P. (C)

No. 1966/2025)

3. Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the

O.A. by submitting that the recruitment to the post of

Constable (Executive) Male in Delhi Police was

conducted strictly in accordance with Rule 9, Rule

14(C) and Rule 24 (Appendix) of the Delhi Police

(Appointment and Recruitment) Rules, 1980, Standing

Order No. HRD-04/2022 and the Recruitment

Notification dated 01.09.2023, which prescribe that a

candidate must be in sound health and free from

colour blindness, with no relaxation permissible. It was

contended that the applicant was declared medically

unfit on account of defective colour vision in the

Detailed Medical Examination conducted on

20.01.2024 and again in the Review Medical

##PAGE5## ##PAGE6##

6

Item No.92/ Court-IV O.A. No.1003/2024

4. In rejoinder learned counsel for the applicant

submitted that the applicant has been arbitrarily and

illegally declared medically unfit solely on the ground of

“Defective Colour Vision,” which is neither prescribed

as a disqualification in the SSC Recruitment

Notification dated 01.09.2023, nor under the Delhi

Police Recruitment Rules or Standing Orders. Further,

the Notification dated 24.04.2024 issued by UPSC for

recruitment to uniformed forces (including CAPFs)

expressly recognizes CP-II and CP-III (Defective Colour

Vision) as permissible for appointment, thereby

reinforcing that defective colour vision is distinct from

colour blindness. Despite qualifying all stages and

securing a place in the final merit list, the applicant

has been denied appointment in violation of the

principle of legitimate expectation, rendering the

impugned medical findings arbitrary, erroneous, and

unsustainable in law.

5. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties

and perused the pleadings available on record.

##PAGE7##

7

Item No.92/ Court-IV O.A. No.1003/2024

6. ANALYSIS :

6.1. We observe that the present case squarely falls

within the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of

Delhi in Priti Yadav v. Union of India (W.P. (C) No.

3930/2020) and the reliance placed by the learned

counsel for the applicant on the aforesaid judgments of

the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the Hon’ble High Court

of Delhi is misplaced and cannot be applied to the facts

of the present case.

6.2. The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, in Priti Yadav v.

Union of India (supra), has emphatically underscored

the necessity of finality in medical assessment by

expert bodies and has deprecated judicial interference.

The Hon’ble High Court observed as under:

“8….There has to be a finality in decision making, as

is there in the justice delivery system. It cannot be

lost sight of that no mala fides are attributed with

respect to any of the medical examinations or to the

team of medical professionals conducting the medical

examination. It is the medical practitioners of the Air

Force and Defence Services, who have themselves

undergone the requisite trainings and discharge the

functions of the organization, who are best suited to

form an opinion as to the medical fitness of the

candidates to be recruited and once they have so

formed their opinion, there can be no interference

therewith, at the mere asking of a

rejected/disgruntled candidate.”

##PAGE8##

8

Item No.92/ Court-IV O.A. No.1003/2024

6.3. We also draw a reference to the decision rendered

by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in SSC & ors. vs.

Sh. Gaurav Rana (W.P. (C) No. 13849/2024) decided

on 27.11.2025, wherein the Hon’ble High Court

observed as under:

“10. In the present case, there is a consistent report

of DME and RME with respect to the defective vision

in the right eye of the respondent. Though the

respondent relied upon the reports of All India

Institute of Medical S

Click Here to Read the rest of this document