##PAGE1##

1

OA No. 702/2026

Item No. 07 (C-2)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

OA No. 702/2026

This the 18^th Day of May, 2026

Hon’ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)

Hon’ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)

Amrita D/o Sh. Dalchand

Aged about 22 years,

R/o House No. 35, Dhonda, Pola,

District Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh – 483336.

.…Applicant

(By Advocate : Mr. Shaileshwar Yadav)

VERSUS

1. Union of India

Through its Secretary,

Ministry of Home Affairs,

North Block, New Delhi – 110001.

2. The Secretary

Department of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions,

Department of Personnel & Training,

North Block, New Delhi – 110001.

3. Staff Selection Commission

Through its Chairman,

5th Floor, Lodhi Road,

CGO Complex, Block No. 12,

New Delhi – 110003.

4. Regional Director (MPR)

Staff Selection Commission,

5th Floor, Investment Building,

LIC Complex, Pandri,

Raipur, Chhattisgarh – 492004.

5. Deputy Commissioner of Police

Recruitment Cell,

New Police Lines, Kingsway Camp,

Delhi – 110009.

.... RESPONDENTS

(By Advocate : Mr. Jalaj Agarwal )

ARTI

ARTI

2026.05.21 16:43:11+05'30'

2

OA No. 702/2026

Item No. 07 (C-2)

ORDER (ORAL)

Hon’ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)

The present O.A. has been received from the Jabalpur Bench pursuant to the

transfer petition filed by the applicant having been allowed. Learned counsel for

the applicant submits that the issue involved in the present O.A. is squarely

covered by the judgment passed by the Principal Bench in O.A. No. 969/2024

decided on 18.08.2025.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents, while relying upon the counter reply,

particularly paragraph 14 thereof, submits as under:

“That it is also worthwhile to mention here that on both occasions of conducting the medical

examination of the applicant, i.e., DME and RME, keloids were reported on the chest and back

of the applicant, which amounts to a physical deformity. Hence, as per the norms mentioned at

Point No. 13 of the Notice of Examination, she was rightly declared medically unfit. Moreover,

the decision of the Review Medical Board is final and no appeal/representation against the

decision of the Review Medical Board is entertained. As such, the applicant was not issued the

Offer of Appointment letter.”

3. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case and upon perusal

of the order passed by the Coordinate Bench in O.A. No. 969/2024, relevant para

of the same reads as under:-

“12. We are mindful of the respondents' contention that standards in

uniformed forces must be strict. However, judicial interference is justified

where the disqualification is based on conjecture rather than cogent medical

evidence, particularly when higher judicial fora have already ruled on the

very condition in issue. In the present case, we are not substituting our own

views for those of the medical board but are only giving effect to the binding

precedents laid down by the Hon'ble High Court. The Original Application

qua Applicant No. 4, Ms. Khushbu Kumari, ought to be decided in her favor

in line with the ratio laid down in the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court in

SSC v. Aman Singh(supra) and SSC v. Shruti Mishra (supra).

13. In light of the foregoing, we hold that the rejection of the applicant on

medical grounds cannot be sustained. The respondents are accordingly

ARTI

ARTI

2026.05.21 16:43:11+05'30'

3

OA No. 702/2026

Item No. 07 (C-2)

directed to refer the applicant for a fresh medical examination by a duly

constituted Medical Board in light of the directions in terms of SSC v. Aman

Singh (supra) and SSC v. Shruti Mishra (supra) within a period of thirty (30)

days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

14. In the event that the applicant is declared fit, the respondents shall issue

the offer of appointment to her for the post of Constable (Executive) Female

in Delhi Police 2023 in accordance with her merit position and rules, within a

further period of forty-five days thereafter.

15. Pending MAs, if any, shall also be disposed of. No order as to costs.”

4. We are convin