WP.302.22

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.

…

WRIT PETITION NO. 302 OF 2022

Samadhan s/o Rama Patil

.. PETITIONER

Versus

The Director General, CRPF and others .. RESPONDENTS

Mr. R.N.Ghuge, Advocate for the Petitioners

Mr. V.A. Bramhe, Advocate for Respondents

….

CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR &

ANIL L. PANSARE JJ.

DATE

: 21 MARCH 2022

P.C. :

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

The petitioner has sought to quash and set aside the order

dated 8 May 2021 issued by the Respondent No.3-Commandant,

Group Centre, Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), Nagpur,

whereby the appointment of the Petitioner to the post of Constable

(General Duty) CRPF, was cancelled.

3.

A notice dated 21 July 2018 was issued by the

Respondent-CRPF inviting applications from the candidates to the

post of Constables in Central Armed Police Forces, National

WP.302.22

2

Investigation Agency, Secretariat Security Force and Assam Rifles.

The Petitioner applied for the said post.

4.

The Petitioner had attended the Physical Efficiency Test

on 28 August 2019 at CRPF, Pune. The Petitioner was referred to

medical examination at Government Medical College, Nagpur. In

the medical examination held on 18 January 2020, at the time of

recruitment, the Petitioner was declared fit. Thereafter, the Petitioner

was provisionally selected for appointment as Constable (General

Duty) by letter dated 2 February 2021. An offer of appointment was

issued to the Petitioner on 13 February 2021. It was also stated that

the findings/opinion of Recruitment Medical Board was valid for one

year from the date of fitness to join the service. Since the period of

one year had elapsed between the physical examination of the

Petitioner at Pune, the Petitioner was directed to report to a detailed

medical examination at Group Centre, CRPF, Pune. The Petitioner

reported before the Board at Pune and, on 31 March 2021, the

Petitioner was declared medically ‘unfit’. In the said medical

examination, the Medical Board declared the Petitioner unfit due to

“soft tissue mallet finger of Rt. distal phalanx middle finger”.

5.

After the examination, the Petitioner’s case was referred

for opinion and necessary direction. The opinion was given on 1

April 2021 and referring to guidelines dated 7 April 2014, the

Respondent-CRPF requested the Director General of Police,

(Medical) CRPF, Nagpur to review the medical examination report.

WP.302.22

3

The Review Medical Board had declared the Petitioner ‘unfit’ on 4

May 2021.

6.

Since the Petitioner was declared unfit, the offer of

appointment to the Petitioner was cancelled. Being aggrieved, the

Petitioner is before us.

7.

The learned counsel for the Petitioner firstly submitted

that the Petitioner was considered fit in the detailed medical

examination at the time of recruitment process and the opinion of

the first medical examination cannot be simply discarded. The

learned Counsel submitted that as per the guidelines dated 7 April

2014 referred to by the Respondents, though the validity of medical

examination is for one year, the candidate should not be declared

unfit on the same ground on which he was found fit in the

recruitment medical examination. The learned Counsel submitted

that the Medical Board while giving opinion on 4 May 2021 has not

considered the opinion of the subject expert which would clearly

show that the Petitioner cannot be considered as unfit. The learned

Counsel submitted that the guidelines issued by the Government of

India, Ministry of Home Affairs regarding recruitment medical

examination in the Central Police force and Assam Rifles on May

2015 emphasises upon giving due weightage to the opinion of the

subject expert. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has relied

upon the decision of the Division Bench of Delhi High Court in