NIRMALA RAO

2026:CGHC:1625 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2270 of 2015

1 - Sambhu Korram S/o Sonaru Korram Aged About 25 Years R/o Village And Post-

Dhaudhai, Tahsil- Narayanpur, District- Narayanpur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - Deleted Union Of India As Per Honble Court Order Dt. 25/09/17. 2 - The Inspector General Border Security Force, Chhattisgarh, Bsp, Higher Secondary School Building, Opposite-Sbi Maroda-Utai, Risali Sector Bhilai, District :

Durg, Chhattisgarh

3 - The Commander S.T.C., Border Security Force, Churachandpur, District- Churachandpur Manipur, Pin- 795006, District : Churachandpur, Manipur. 4 - The Dean District Hospital, Churachandpur, District- Churachandpur Manipur, Pin- 795006, District : Churachandpur, Manipur.

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner : Ms. Itu Rani Mukherjee, Advocate holding the brief of Shri N.K. Chatterjee, Advocate.

For Respondents No.2 & 3: Shri Tushar Dhar Diwan, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Order on Board

12.01.2026

1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking for the following reliefs:

“10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby setting-aside the impugned order dated 16.4.2015 (Annexure-P/1).

10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.”

2. The facts, in a nutshell, are that an advertisement was floated by respondents No.2 & 3 for appointment to the post of Constable (GD) sometimes in the year 2014. The petitioner participated in the selection process and was provisionally recruited vide order dated 9.2.2015. The petitioner reported at S.T.C., B.S.F., Churachandpur, District Manipur and was sent for a pre-training medical examination on 18.3.2015. During the course of medical examination, he was detected to be colour blind vide report dated 19.3.2015 and resultantly, he was declared unfit for service in B.S.F. The petitioner has challenged the decision taken by respondents No.2 & 3 dated 16.4.2015 by filing this petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that the decision taken by the respondent authorities is illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice. She would submit that no opportunity was afforded to the petitioner by the respondents. She would contend that the petitioner should have been afforded an opportunity to approach the higher medical authorities for reexamination of his eye-sight. She would pray to allow this petition.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents No.2 & 3 would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that the petitioner was issued with an offer of appointment on probation for a period of two years. He would contend that the petitioner was medically examined on 19.3.2015 and was found to be suffering from colour blindness, rendering him unfit for service in the Border Security Force. In view of his colour blindness, the petitioner, in all probabilities, would not be an effective member of the force and keeping in mind the fatal consequences, he was removed from service according to circular issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, dated 27.2.2013 & 28.5.2013. He would contend that vide circular dated 28.5.2013 it was clarified that any person recruited after 27.2.2013 if found colour blind even after recruitment, shall promptly be boarded out of service. He would contend that the decision was taken after medical examination of the petitioner strictly in accordance with the circular dated 28.5.2013. He would submit that the petition deserves to be dismissed.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on record.

6. The petitioner was selected and appointed vide order dated 9.2.2015 on probation for a period of two years and later on, he was sent for training. The first part of training consisted of a m