The petitioner sought review of a medical unfitness order. The court held the writ petition was devoid of merit. The issue had already been resolved, a further test was barred, and the petitioner concealed the review board date, leading to dismissal.
Writ petition dismissed.
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. - 8662 of 2020 Petitioner :- Krishanveer Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- R.P.S. Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
Written instructions supplied by learned standing counsel is taken on record.
The present petition has been filed seeking writ of mandamus commanding respondents to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner on 27.4.2019 for review medical examination in accordance with Rule 15 of U.P Police Constable and Head Constable Service (Amended) Rules, 2017.
As per the instructions received by learned Standing counsel, first medical examination of the petitioner was done on 27.4.2019. On an appeal filed by the petitioner, review medical examination was conducted on 30.4.2019. In both the rounds of medical examination, the petitioner was declared unfit on the ground of some defect in his ear. The report of the review medical examination dated 30.4.2019 has been appended as Annexure-'5' to the written instructions received by the learned Standing counsel. The petitioner had recorded his presence before the Review Medical Board on 30.4.2019. The copy of the attendance sheet at Parishishta-1 bearing signature and thumb impression of the petitioner has also been appended. The appeal filed by the petitioner on 27.4.2019 has already been considered by the competent authority.
The prayer in the writ petition to issue a direction to the respondents to decide the appeal filed on 27.4.2019 is, thus, rendered infructuous. As far as the second prayer of the petitioner to conduct a further medical test, it is noteworthy that as per the procedure laid down for the recruitment to the postin-question, first medical test and review medical test both have been conducted. No further prayer for conducting a medical test can be accepted. Moreover, the writ petition has been filed after a period of more than one year of the conduct of the first medical test. The stage of the selection process has not been disclosed.
It is further noted that the petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands as he has deliberately concealed the fact of medical examination by the Review Medical Board on
30.4.2019. The prayer made by the learned Advocate for the petitioner to grant indulgence to challenge the decision of the Review Medical Board dated 30.4.2019 is, therefore, rejected.
For the above reasons, the writ petition is found devoid of merit and hence dismissed.
Order Date :- 19.1.2021/Harshita
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition challenging the Review Medical Board's decision after more than a year when the petitioner concealed the Board's date.
Whether a further medical test can be directed after the first and review medical examinations have already been conducted.
Whether the petition should be accepted in view of the petitioner lack of clean hands regarding the Review Medical Board date.
Krishanveer
State Of U P
Sunita Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
