Keshav Kumar Vs Union of India

Union Of India Ministry Of Personnel, Public Grievances And Pension, Department Of Personnel And Training, Staff Selection Commission, Block No. 12, Cgo Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110003

¶10

Director General Crpf (Recruitment Branch), East Block 07, Level - 04, Sector - 01, R.K. Puram, New Delhi - 110066 (Ministry Of Home Affairs)

¶11

Cmo (Sg), (Irla - 4277), Chbbsr, Crpf, Presiding Officer Rme Board - 1 At Gc, Crpf, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G. )

¶12

... Respondents

¶13

For Appellant : Mr. Dheerendra Prasad Mishra, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Dy. Solicitor General

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice and

¶15

2 / 6

¶16

Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge

¶17

Order on Board

¶18

Per Ramesh Sinha, (Chief Justice)

¶19

06.09.2024

¶20

Heard Mr. Dheerendra Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr.Ramakant Mishra, learned Deputy Solicitor General for the respondents.

¶21

The appellant has filed the writ appeal against the order dated 18.07.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No. 5842/2023 by which the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner/ appellant herein.

¶22

Brief facts necessary for disposal of this writ appeal are that respondent No. 1 Staff Selection Commission has invited the post of Constable (GD) General Duty in Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs). The writ petitioner applied for appointment on the said post and he cleared the written examination. He was sent for physical test and according to the pleadings, he was found eligible. The medical test was conducted on 18.07.2023 and result was declared on 21.07.2023 in which certain queries was raised by the doctor with regard to his oral hygiene and his dental points was found less than 14 (8). Thereafter a Review Medical Examination was fixed on 21.07.2023, but no Review Medical Examination was conducted by the respondent and only on 24.07.2023, Review Medical Examination was conducted by the aaRBee Institute of Medical Sciences at Bilaspur and on the basis of which the writ

¶23

3 / 6

¶24

petitioner found fit to be appointed on the post of Constable (GD) in the CRPF. It is further the case of the writ petitioner that respondent-authorities have again taken a Review Medical Examination on 25.07.2023 and the writ petitioner was found unfit for the post of Constable (GD) as his dental points was less than 14 (8), against which, writ petition was filed.

¶25

By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner, against which, this writ appeal.

¶26

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the order dated 25.07.2023 which was under challenge before the learned Single Judge is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the law as the dental points of the writ petitioner is found to be more than 14 dental points. The order dated 25.07.2023 passed by the three Medical Officers namely Mrs.N.T.Mili, CMO (SG) (IRLA – 4277) CHBBSR, Presiding Officer RME Board at GC Bilaspur (C.G.) CT/GD Exam 2022 (PO, Member – 1 Dr. Akhil A, MO, IRLA – 12536149 BM Member, RME Board 1 at GC Bilaspur CT/GDExam 2022 and Member – 2, Dr.Mrs. Manisha Garg, CMD (SG) IRLA, CRPF, Bilaspur (C.G.) CT/GD Exam 2022 is contrary to the report made by the concerned doctor namely Dr.A.K.Maini of the ARBEE Diagnostic Center, Bilaspur, whereby it has been stated that the dental points found to be more than 14 points. Hence, the writ petitioner is liable for the post of Constable General Duty in Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) SSF, Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles and Sepoy in

¶27

4 / 6

¶28

Narcotics Control Bureau Examination-2022. He would further submit that ARBEE Diagnostic Centre, Bilaspur has conducted oral Hygiene Test (Dental Test) and found fit, then on what ground the respondent authorities have declared that the writ petitioner has dental points less than 14. He would also submit that on the basis of report of RME Board dated 25.07.2023 the respondent authorities have declared the writ petitioner medically unfit but the ARBEE Diagnostic Centre, Bilaspur has clearly stated that the writ petitioner has more than 14 dental points. The writ petitioner has Medical Fitness Report (Certificate) for the post of Constable General Duty in Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) SSF, Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles and Sepoy in Narcotics Control Bureau, Examination – 2022. He also contended that as per the Guidelines for Review Medical Boards, in cases of rejection in Review Medical Examination, clinical findings should be corroborated with confirmatory test/investigations/opinion of specialist/super specialist of Govt.Hospital/medical colleges/Govt. approved private medical centers, whichever and wherever applicable. Hence, the medical fitness report made by the ARBEE, Diagnostic Centre, Bilaspur is correct and true as the referral slip has been given by the RME Board only. As such, the writ appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order deserves to be set aside.

¶29

On the other hand, learned Deputy Solicitor General appearing for the respondents supports the impugned order and submits that the learned Single Judge after considering all the aspects of the matter

¶30

5 / 6

¶31

has rightly dismissed the writ petition filed by the writpetitioner, which warrants no interference by this Court.

¶32

We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made hereinabove and also went through the records with utmost circumspection.

¶33

From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned Single Judge has held that the issue involved in the petition is only to the fact that whether the petitioner has more than 14 dental points or less than 14 dental points? Though the page No. 76 of writ petition indicates that he has more than 14 dental points. However, the petitioner was sent for Medical Examination and his dental points was found to be 8 as per Annexure-R/2 and thereafter on Review Examination, his dental points was found to be less than 14 vide Annexure-R/3. Annexure-R/3 issued by the three doctors who are expert in their field.

¶34

CRPF is a force which requires healthy and suitable candidates to be inducted to combat the necessary situation as and when required. The respondents in paragraph 16 has given the importance of higher dental points. The same is quoted herein below :-

¶35

“16. That, the Dental Surgeon of Composite Hospital, CRPF Bilaspur has further submitted that role of dental for physical fitness : Teeth play a vital role in maintaining overall health of an individual. Teeth help in mastication. Proper mastication helps in proper digestion of food, Proper digestion leads to proper absorption of nutrients from the food. Thus necessary for healthy well being. Teeth also helps in proper speech and

¶36

6 / 6

¶37

phonation. Thus helping in clear communication. As per norms and guidelines laid down by the govt. and in the recruitment manual, candidate having less than 14 dental points to be declared unfit.”

¶38

The learned Single Judge has held that the petitioner had not more than 14 dental points particularly when in report of the Review Medical Board Annexure-R/3, he was found to be less than 14 dental points.

¶39

Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, perusing the documents annexed with writ petition as also with writ appeal, also considering the reply/return filed by the respondents in writ petition and the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner, we are of the considered opinion that the learned Single Judge has not committed any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order warranting interference of this Court.

¶40

Accordingly, the writ appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s).

¶41

Sd/- Sd/-

¶42

(Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶43

Shoaib/Amardeep

Keshav Kumar v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Keshav Kumar v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi Kumar Agrawal (Kedia) Vs State of Chhattisgarh

S. Sunil Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Nanak Bhagwandas Aahuja Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vishal Vishwakarma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Niharika Sinha Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Gomati Bai Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.