medical condition is contrary to the guidelines for Recruitment Medical Examination in Central Armed Forces and Assam Rifles. He submits that this guideline is also followed for this recruitment purpose by the CRPF authorities. Referring to clause XII (9), he submits that in the conditions which are listed for rejection of any prospective candidates for appointment during the selection process Sl No. 9 refers to The learned counsel for the “Keloid formation”.

petitioner however submits that this Keloid formation can be a ground for rejection only if the same interferes with the proper wearing of combatisedequipment. He submits that no such finding is recorded in the Review Medical Board and the authorities had rejected it merely because of the presence of Keloid formation. It is submitted that such conclusion by the Medical Board is contrary to the guidelines for recruitment medical examination. He therefore submits the writ petition be allowed and the authorities be directed to recommend the petitioner for appointment as he does not fall within the criteria prescribed at Clause-XII (9) of the guidelines for Recruitment Medical examination in Central Armed Police Forces and Assam Rifles.

5. Ms. Baruah, learned CGC on the other hand submits that the respondents have filed their counter-affidavit. She has referred to various averments made in the affidavit to submit that the medical criteria for a civilian and for a member of the CRPF or CAPF are different. The medical criteria necessary for recruitment in CRPF or other CAPF are very specific and they are specified in the guidelines. These guidelines merely provide instances where a Medical Officer can opine the fitness or the unworthiness of a candidate on medical grounds during the process of recruitment. She submits that there is no challenge to the constitution of the Medical Board and the Medical Board had duly examined him and had taken into consideration the opinions rendered by the other doctors of the civil hospital, including that of the GMCH and had therefore opined that the petitioner is found to be unfit to be appointed in the post of Constable/Driver in view of his medical condition as prescribed at Clause XII(9).

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon careful perusal of the pleadings as well as the guidelines, it is seen that the guideline prescribes particulars of physical deformities which may be considered grounds for rejection for disability for a prospective candidate for appointment into an Armed Force like that of CRPF upon such opinion being rendered by the Medical Specialists constituted by the appointing authority. The petitioner upon being medically examined was rejected on two grounds namely “Multiple . The medical opinion enclosed Keloid Chest” and Cardiac Murmur”

and available in the pleadings also reflects that the Medical board had referred to the opinion rendered by GMCH. During the process of examination of the petitioner it is seen that it was the CRPF authority who had referred the petitioner for medical examination to the GMCH. The appropriate department in the GMCH had thereafter rendered their respective opinions.

7. In so far as the cardiology opinion is concerned, there were no anomalies found and he was considered to be fit pursuant examinations carried by the GMCH.

8. In so far as the dermatology opinion is concerned, the specialist in the GMC opined after due examination the petitioner that he is presenting currently with Keloid on his chest and the current “

lesion is not contagious and does not hamper his daily activities. However, the Review Medical Board upon due examination of the writ petitioner as well as upon due consideration of the opinions rendered, rejected the candidature of the writ petitioner on the ground that he is found unfit because of Cardiac Murmur as well as “

Keloid over Chest “ ”.

9. The revised uniform guidelines for medical examination for recruitment into Central Armed forces and Assam Rifles ar