JUDGMENT

1.The writ petition is filed challenging Exhibits P2(a) and P2(b)

reports of the Detailed Medical Examination (DME for short) issued by the 2nd respondent as well as Exhibits P5(a) and P5(b) reports of the Review Medical Examination (RME for short) issued by the 3rd respondent. The petitioners also seek directions to the respondents to constitute a Medical Board consisting of combatised medical officers and independent experts from Government Medical Colleges for conducting medical examination of the petitioners and to conduct a further medical examination in respect of the petitioners.

2.The RMEs which are complained of were conducted on

10.10.2020. This writ petition was filed on 3.2.2021. When the writ petition came up for admission, it was noticed that in respect of all similar writ petitions which had been filed till January, 2021, an interim order had already been rendered on 20.01.2021 directing the selection to go on to all posts except the posts to which the writ petitions had already been entertained. Those writ petitions were also heard and judgments were rendered on 7.4.2021. This Court, after examining the records of the Medical Examinations conducted by the respondents had found that in many cases the reports were supported by proper medical examinations by specialist Doctors and that no interference was warranted. However, in certain of the cases, where it was found that the rejections were not based on objective criteria, the respondents were directed to conduct a further examinations of the candidates through a Review Medical Board.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that delay on the part of the petitioners in approaching this Court is negligible and that even if there is some delay, the delay is not an absolute impediment and that this Court should exercise jurisdiction since similar cases have already been considered and allowed. The decisions of the Apex Court in Inder Pal Yadav and others v. Union of India and others [(1985) 2 SCC 648], Tukaram Kana Joshi and others vs. M.I.D.C and others [ (2013) 1 SCC 353] and State of Uttar Pradesh and others vs. Arvind Kumar Srivastava and others [(2015) 1 SCC 347] are relied on.

4.A statement has been placed on record by the respondents. It is submitted that both the petitioners were found unfit in the DME as well as the RME on the ground of Hypertension with Tachycardia. It is submitted that the RME had been conducted as early as on 10.10.2020 and that the findings were confirmed by 3-4 different readings in accordance with the Guidelines for Recruitment Medical Examination in Central Armed Police Forces and Assam Rifles dated 20.5.2015. It is stated in paragraph 14 of the statement as follows:-

“14. During DME, the candidates were declared unfit due to Hypertension with Tachycardia on 21/01/2020 and the candidates were again declared unfit in RME due to same reasons. The same was confirmed by four different readings/Blood Pressure recording which were mentioned in Form No.4 to each petitioner. Further, the Blood Pressure of the candidates were examined four times at interval of two hours each. They were allowed to rest and relax in the arrangments made for the purpose at the Recruitment Centre for examining such similar cases by Medical/Para-Medical staff who were readily available. The raise in Blood Pressure of the petitioners have not transient in nature or due to excitement etc. or due to any organic diseases. The petitioners were inherently suffering from Hypertension with Tachycardia as is evident from their Blood pressure which consistently showed higher readings than the prescribed level. Further, ECG, RFT tests were also conducted before coming to a conclusion by the RME Board. As per para of 6(1) & (3) of Guidelines for Recruitment Medical Examination of CAPF and AR dated 20/05/2015, the disease of Hypertension and tachycardia is disqualification. As such instructions were scrupulously followed by the RME Board before coming to a conclus