Color blindness is not a disqualification for appointment as Lok Rakshak under existing rules; disqualification must be explicitly stated in recruitment rules.

JUDGEMENT

1. Heard learned Advocate Mrs.Mamta Vyas on behalf of the petitioner and learned AGP Ms.Bhati on behalf of the respondent State.

2. Issue Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent State.

3. With the consent of the learned Advocates for the parties, the present petition is taken up for final hearing.

4. By this petition, the petitioner challenges a decision of respondent No.2 of not appointing the petitioner on the post of “Lok Rakshak (Constable)” on the ground that the petitioner had been declared unfit in medical examination.

5. Learned Advocate Mrs.Mamta Vyas for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had been selected for the post of Lok Rakshak through the process conducted by the respondent Authorities vide an Advertisement published on 15.8.2018, and whereas the petitioner had cleared both the written as well as physical examinations and after verification of all requisite documents, the petitioner had been posted at Morbi, subject to clearance of medical examination. Mrs.Mamta Vyas would submit that as per the procedure, the petitioner was required to undergo medical check- up. That after the preliminary medical check-up, the Residential Medical Officer, General Hospital, Morbi issued a certificate on 15.8.2020, and referred the case of the petitioner to the Board of Referees. The Board of Referees had also opined that the petitioner is unfit on account of the defective eye vision. According to Mrs.Mamta Vyas, in the letter dated 25.9.2020 addressed to respondent No.2, the Medical Officer opined that the eye vision of the petitioner was defective on account of colour blindness. The respondent No.2, on the basis of the letter of the Medical Officer passed the impugned order dated 6.10.2020, cancelled the appointment of the petitioner on the post in question, which necessitated the present petition.

6. Learned Advoate Mrs.Mamta Vyas would submit that the issue involved in the present petition is no more res integra more particularly in view of the fact that a decision of learned Single Judge of this Court had been confirmed by Hon’ble Division Bench, and the said judgement has been consistently followed by various decisions of this Court. Learned Advocate Mrs.Mamta Vyas has drawn the attention of this Court to a common oral order dated 26.7.2018 passed in a group of petitions being Special Civil Application No.15431 of 2017 and allied matters, where similar issues were considered. She would further submit that the above referred decision of the learned Single Judge was challenged before the Hon’ble Division Bench in Letters Patel Appeal No.1136 of 2018 and the said appeal was allowed vide judgement and order dated 2.11.2018. Mrs.Mamta Vyas has also drawn the attention of this Court to a decision of a Coordinate Bench rendered in Special Civil Application No.3739 of 2018 on 8.4.2019, whereby the Coordinate Bench, after eloberately discussing various decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court, allowed the said petition and gave certain directions to the respondent Authorities therein.

She also relies upon the decision of a Coordinate Bench passed in Special Civil Application Nos.3231 & 3236 of 2020 delivered on 10.2.2020 and submits that the case of the present petitioner is squarely covered by the above referred decision of this Hon’ble Court.

7. Learned AGP could not controvert the legal position inasmuch as this Court speaking through learned Single Judge as well as Hon'ble Division Bench ha