J U D G M E N T

SAURABH BANERJEE, J.

1. As per facts, the respondents issued an advertisement dated 24.04.2019 for the post of Assistant Commandant (AC) in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF). The petitioner applied for the said post, appeared and cleared the written, physical efficiency test and personality on 20.11.2020 securing 278th rank. Thereafter, vide appointment letter dated 13.04.2023, the respondent no.2 appointed him to the post of AC in the Border Security Force (BSF) and directed him to join Tenakpur Training Academy by 15.05.2023.

2. As per procedure, re-medical examination of petitioner was to be conducted to detect/ discover any disease/ disability/ accidental injury incurred during the intervening period of initial medical examination, wherein, he was found ‘Unfit’ by the Medical Board (MB) on 15.06.2023 as being ‘overweight’ and having ‘left renal calculi with mild hydroureteronephrosis with haematuria’. Thereafter, the petitioner was once again found ‘Unfit’ as he was suffering from ‘left renal calculi with mild hydroureteronephrosis’ by the Review Medical Board (RMB) consisting of three medical officers including a Specialist on 19.09.2023.

3. As per petitioner, he was unaware of anything as he was neither informed anything nor allowed to leave the Academy nor was sent for basic training till 04.11.2023, when he received the letter dated 25.10.2023 informing him for the first time that he had been declared ‘unfit to undergo basic training’ as he was suffering from ‘left renal calculi with mild hydroureteronephrosis’.

4. Aggrieved therefrom, the petitioner has preferred the present petition under Article 226 of The Constitution of India seeking quashing of MB examination report/ impugned order dated 25.10.2023, passed by Forces Headquarters, IG (MED), BSF-respondent no.5 and a direction to respondent no.2 to consider him medically fit as per the report of the District Hospital, Pune dated 06.11.2023 as well as direction to the respondent no.2 to constitute an independent medical to determine the fitness of the petitioner as also a further direction to the respondent no.2 for inducting him to train alongwith 48th batch.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the RMB was conducted in a very casual/ mechanical manner and in violation of Guidelines for Recruitment Medical Examination in CAPF since the petitioner was neither given a copy of the report of the medical examination nor of the RMB examination. She further submitted that the petitioner had to leave the academy after applying for a leave on the grounds of ailing mother, furthermore, since the petitioner was not getting any instructions from the respondents for his next course of action, he wrote an email dated

03.10.2023 to respondents for the same.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner lastly submitted that the petitioner got an independent test done from the District Hospital, Pune on

06.11.2023 where no such anomaly was detected.

7. Per-contra learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the RMB examination of the petitioner was done by competent officers with one Specialist when he was found ‘Unfit’ at the relevant point of time. He further submitted, in any event, the petitioner was well aware since before that he had to be fit at the point of joining for training.

8. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the documents on record as well.

9. As borne out from the facts herein, the petitioner was, admittedly, initially rejected by the MB on 15.06.2023 and thereafter, once again, by the RMB on 19.09.2023 and on both occasions he was found suffering from ‘left renal calculi with mild hydroureteronephrosis’. Needless to say, the RMB was comprising of three medical officers including a Specialist, who, being expert in his field, had the full discretion to select or reject any candidate be it the petitioner as well.

10. As such, since the petitioner has been declared ‘Unfit’ by two Specialist Forums, i.e. both