Dismissed

Puneet Yadav v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC19 Dec 2016W.P.(C)/11884/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected a writ petition seeking a fresh medical examination for appointment as an Airman. The petitioner, disqualified due to a cardiac ailment, could not show cogent grounds to interfere with the Medical Board's decision despite a co-candidate being cleared in appeal.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is rejected; no fresh medical examination will be deputed.

Puneet Yadav Vs Union of India & Ors. — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~57

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 11884/2016

¶4

PUNEET YADAV ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through Mr. U. Srivastava, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Prakash Yadav, Senior Panel Counsel for respondents.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHAWLA O R D E R % 19.12.2016

¶10

In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought directions on the respondents to consider the request of the petitioner for conducting a fresh medical examination of the petitioner and to depute the petitioner to the post of Airman in the event, the petitioner is found fit.

¶11

According to the petitioner, the petitioner qualified at all stages of the selection process for appointment of Airman, after which, he was called for medical test on 29.07.2016. He was, however, disqualified on the ground of an abnormality found in the Echo Cardiogram (ECG) report of the petitioner. The petitioner was diagnosed to suffer from ‘Tia Cardiac’, a cardiac ailment.

¶12

The petitioner appealed and was re-examined by the Medical Examination Board. The Appeal Medical Board also disqualified the W.P.(C) 11884/2016 page 1 of 2

¶13

page 1 of 2

¶14

petitioner on the same ground. It is the case of the petitioner that another candidate, namely one Om Prakash Singh, who had also been disqualified in the Medical Examination due to ECG abnormality, appealed after which he was cleared. The fact that a co-candidate may have qualified in appeal is no ground for further medical examination of the petitioner, whose disqualification was based on the ECG Report.

¶15

The petitioner has enclosed reports of private practitioners. It is not for this Court to adjudicate which report is correct, the report of the private practitioner from whom the petitioner got himself examined or the doctors constituting the Medical Board/Appeal Medical Board. No cogent grounds have been made out in the writ petition for interference with the decision of the Medical Board/Appeal Medical Board.

¶16

The writ petition is therefore, rejected.

¶17

INDIRA BANERJEE, J

¶18

ANIL KUMAR CHAWLA, J

¶19

DECEMBER 19, 2016 rs

¶20

W.P.(C) 11884/2016

¶21

page 2 of 2

Puneet Yadav v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puneet Yadav v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Heritage India Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Value Added Tax

Bharat Enterprises Vs the Commissioner Value Added Tax

Sunint Enterprises Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Trade & Taxes & Anr.

M/S Stelco Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Trade & Taxes & Anr.

Shamsher Singh Vs Union of India & Anr.

Om Parkash Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Rajesh Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Pritam and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

S.N. Santosh Kumar Vs M/S Akshya Textiles Ltd. & Ors.

M/S Sps Steels Rolling Mills Ltd. & Anr. Vs Appellate Authority of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction and Ors.

M/S Meena Advertisers Vs Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd.

Ramphal Vs Union of India & Ors.

Commissioner of Income Tax (International TAXATION)-1 Vs Comptel Oyj

S.C. Chaturvedi, Sena Medal Vs Union of India & Ors.