Single judge dismissed a writ petition challenging a review medical board's finding of a defect in eyes due to lack of Civil Hospital opinions. The court held independent medical opinions cannot dispute Medical Board findings absent malafide and noted the select list was already declared.
Writ petition dismissed for want of merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 36 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1812 of 2021 Petitioner :- Madhubala Gangwar Respondent :- Union Of India And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The petitioner herein seeks to challenge the decision of the first medical board and the review medical board on 27.10.2020 on the ground that the opinion of the doctors of Civil Hospital, had not been obtained before forming an opinion that the petitioner suffers from defect in eyes. Some of the prescriptions/OPD slips of other hospitals have been brought on record to state that the petitioner is completely fit and there is no defect in her eyes.
The plea taken in the writ petition cannot be entertained. It is to be noted that the opinion of the independent medical experts, cannot be taken as a ground to challenge the findings of two Medical Boards constituted by the respondent during the recruitment process. Moreso, in absence of any allegations of malafide or imputation of any of the members of the Medical Board that they had given wrong report for some extraneous consideration.
The Division Bench of this Court in the State of U.P. and other vs. Rahul (Special Appeal Defective No. 70 of 2016) vide judgment and order dated 3.2.2016 has clearly held that this Court is not competent to dispute the opinion of the Medical Board on the basis of the report of any other medical expert. A self contained procedure has been provided to redress the grievances of the candidates who appeared in the examination conducted by the U.P. Police Recruitment and Promotion Board by providing them an opportunity to file appeal against the findings of the Medical Board and to appear before the Review Medical Board.
It may be further noted that the final result of the select list declared on 21.01.2019 and, thus, the writ petition cannot be entertained to issue any direction to respondent to constitute a fresh review medical board.
In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merits.
Order Date :- 12.2.2021 P Kesari
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition can be entertained to challenge the opinion of a medical board on recruitment grounds based on another medical expert's report without allegations of malafide.
Whether the court can direct the respondent to constitute a fresh review medical board when the select list has already been declared.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of U.P. and other vs. RahulFollowed¶6
State of U.P. and other vs. Rahul (Special Appeal Defective No. 70 of 2016)
Madhubala Gangwar
Union Of India
2 Others
Sunita Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
