(1 of 4)

[CW-10887/2021]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10887/2021

Vikas Kumar S/o Shri Dharam Veer Singh, Aged About 27 Years,

R/o Village And Post Bagari, Tehsil Lakshmangarh, District Sikar

(Raj.)

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

Union Of India, Through The Chairman, Central

Recruitment Committee/si, Ministry Of Railways, New

Delhi.

2.

The General Manager, North Western Railways, Nwr

Headquarters, Jagatpura, Jaipur.

3.

The Principal Chief Security Commissioner, Railways

Protection Force (Pcsc/rpf), North Western Railways, Nwr

Headquarters, Jagatpura, Jaipur.

4.

The Principal Chief Medical Director, North Western

Railways, Nwr Headquarters, Jagatpura, Jaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Sarthak Rastogi

For Respondent(s)

:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

Judgment / Order

27/09/2021

The petitioner by way of this writ petition assails the

Government of India notification dated 10.11.2013, whereby, the

policy guidelines for medical fitness of candidates were revised

and candidates having done LASIK surgery, earlier declared to be

unfit for recruitment in A & B category which includes B1 category

for which the petitioner had applied namely Sub-Inspector in

Railway Protection Force.

(2 of 4)

[CW-10887/2021]

Learned counsel submits that the petitioner had participated

in the selection process and he had already undergone LASIK

surgery where after his eye vision is 6/6 and therefore he was

entitled to be selected. However, the petitioner who has already

cleared the written examination as well as the interview has been

declared unfit for selection. Learned counsel submits that as per

the advertisement, the Railway medical manual was required to be

followed and in the Railway Medical Manual, there was no such

provision relating to LASIK surgery. The petitioner submitted his

representation where after the Railways has informed by way of

the circular dated 10.11.2013 which provides that all surgeries

done to correct refractive error, would be unfit for recruitment to A

and B categories. Learned counsel submits that such a decision

taken by the Railway Board dated 10.11.2013 is clearly illegal and

unjustified as in State Police Services such a refractive surgery is

allowed and a candidate is not declared unfit on account of the

same. Learned counsel further submits that even for Air Force

refractive surgery category persons are allowed to participate in

selection for flying as well as non flying. Even in other services the

refractive surgery is not a disability for the purpose of

appointment.

I have considered the submissions.

This court finds that the advertisement has specifically

mentioned as under:-

“The candidates who appear in

Document Verification will be sent for a

medical examination at the Railway Hospitals.

They will have to qualify in Medical category

‘B-1’ as prescribed in the Indian Railway

Medical Manual. Those wearing glasses or

having flat foot, knock, squint eyes, color

blindness and other bodily defects are not

(3 of 4)

[CW-10887/2021]

eligible for appointment. Sending for Medical

Examination will not guarantee employment

and does not reflect that the candidate has

been included in the select list.”

Thus, those wearing glasses were informed that they are not

eligible for appointment. Refractive surgery is a method by which

a person who is used to wearing glasses earlier, may not have to

wear glasses any more and by such a surgery the person itself

gets a glass implanted. Thus a candidate who has undergone a

refractive surgery (LASIK), is at the same footing as a person who

is wearing glasses. Some people can afford LASIK surgery while

others may not be able to afford it and continue to wear glasses.

They both will form the same class. In the advertisement all the

candidates who wear glasses have been specifically ment