J U D G M E N T

AJAY DIGPAUL, J.

1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction thereby calling for records and quash the impugned order dated 22.03.2025 issued by the P.O. Review Medical Board, Mosb-2024 Ch Joradhakalan CRPF, New Delhi vide which it was communicated to the petitioner that he was declared unfit during the Review Medical Board because of single testis in his scrotum.

(ii) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction thereby directing the Respondent No 2, i.e. ITBP and Respondent No.3 is P.O. Review Medical Board, Mosb-2024 Ch Joradhakalan CRPF, New Delhi to consider the petitioner medically Fit for the post of Assistant Commandant/Medical Officer under the advertisement annexed as Annexure-P2.”

Brief facts

2. The relevant facts, as emerged from the pleadings, are as follows:

a. The Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, in October 2024, published an advertisement for recruitment to Group A post for various positions such as Super Specialist Medical Officers (Second-in-Command), Specialist Medical Officers (Deputy Commandant) and Medical Officers (Assistant Commandant) in Central Armed Police Forces (Border Security Force, Central Reserve Police Force, Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force, Sashastra Seema Bal and Assam Rifles) in the relevant pay scale.

b. The petitioner is stated to have applied for the post of Medical Officer (Assistant Commandant), (Hereinafter “subject post”). During the process of recruitment, the petitioner had undergone medical examination test, (Hereinafter “MET”), wherein, he was declared medically unfit on 20.03.2025 with the reason ‘Left Testis absent. H/o Left Orchidectomy’.

c. Pursuant to the above, the matter was referred to the Review Medical Board, (Hereinafter “RMB”) which again declared the petitioner medically unfit on 22.03.2025.

d. Aggrieved by the aforesaid decision, the instant petition has been filed seeking setting aside of the same.

Submissions on behalf of the petitioner

3. Mr. Abhay Kumar Bhargava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the impugned order is bad in law and liable to be set aside as the petitioner has been declared medically unfit without taking into consideration of the fact that in the year 2014, the petitioner had undergone a surgery because of torsion and his left testis was removed.

4. An ultrasound report dated 14.02.2014, appended with the instant petition as Annexure P-4, shows that the petitioner suffered from torsion of the left testis. Pursuant to his surgery, the petitioner’s left testis was sent for examination and a medical report dated 27.02.2014 stipulates that the petitioner had haemorrhagic infraction of testis.

5. The petitioner relies on the ‘Guidelines For Recruitment Medical Examination In Central Armed Police Forces And Assam Rifles’, published vide Office Memorandum dated 20.05.2015, (Hereinafter “CAPF Guidelines”), as per which ‘surgical removal of testis (Orchidectomy) for torsion’ is not a ground for disqualification. In the instant case, the petitioner’s candidature has been rejected solely on the basis of having one testis

in scrotum and not on the ground of being otherwise medically unfit for recruitment to the subject post.

6. It is contended by the petitioner that in other paramilitary forces, where, as per their guidelines such as ‘physical and medical standards for various entries into Army, TRG Academics and Military Schools, published vide Manual dated 16.07.2019’ and ‘physical and medical standards for Indian Air Force, published vide notification of AFCAT 01/2025’, undescended testis/Orchidectomy is not a ground for declaring a person medically unfit.

7. Our attention has further been drawn by the learned counsel for the petitioner to a communication dated 21.03.2025