Allowed

Staff Selection Commission and Ors. v. Teekam Singh Meena

Delhi HC19 Sept 2024W.P.(C)/13100/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court modified the Central Administrative Tribunal's order to allow quashing of medical unfitness. The Court directed re-examination at R.R. Hospital instead of the previous facility, with the appointed report deemed final and binding for the selection process.

What did the court decide?

Tribunal order modified to direct re-medical examination at R.R. Hospital on 09.10.2024. Fresh report deemed final and binding for allowing respondent to join selection process if fit.

Staff Selection Commission and Ors. Vs Teekam Singh Meena — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~66

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 19^th September, 2024

¶4

- W.P.(C) 13100/2024 & CM APPL.54755-57/2024

¶5

STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION AND ORS ....Petitioners Through: Mr. Piyush Gupta and Mr. Prateek Gupta, Advocates

¶6

Versus

¶7

TEEKAM SINGH MEENA .....Respondent Through: Ms. Esha Mazumdar, Mr. Setu Niket, Mr. Ishan Singh, Ms. Unnnia Maya & Ms. Chetna, Advocates

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶10

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

¶11

The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashing and setting aside of order dated 10.05.2024 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (the ‘Tribunal’), Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A. No.519/2024, whereby the learned Tribunal has directed to undertake re-medical examination of respondent within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the said order. Learned Tribunal has further directed the petitioners to convey the final decision to the respondent and if he is found fit, to take further action in accordance with law.

¶12

Notice issued. Ms. Esha Mazumdar, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent.

¶13

With the consent of learned counsel for parties, the present petition is

¶14

W.P.(C) 13100/2024 Page 1 of 4

¶15

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ROHIT KUMAR Signing Da te:2 1.09.2024 16:57

¶16

taken up for final hearing and disposal.

¶17

The brief background of the case is that pursuant to notification dated 01.09.2023 for direct recruitment to the post of Constable (Exe) Male and Female in Delhi Police, 2023, the respondent applied for the post of Constable (Exe.) Male. He appeared in the examination process conducted by petitioner-Staff Selection Commission (‘SSC’). The result of Computer Based Examination was declared on 31.12.2023 and thereafter, Physical Endurance and Measurement Test (PE & MT) were conducted by the Delhi Police from 13.01.2024 to 20.01.2024. The medical examination of candidates, who qualified in the PE & MT, was conducted at CAPFs Hospitals as per medical norms.

¶18

On 20.01.2024, the respondent was called for Detailed Medical Examination (DME) at Composite Hospital, CRPF, Jharoda Kalan, Delhi wherein he was declared unfit on account of ‘Umbilical Hernia’ . On 24.01.2024, respondent was called for Review Medical Examination (RME) at the same hospital and he was declared unfit on the same ground by the review medical board.

¶19

Thereafter, on 25.01.2024, the respondent got himself examined from Safdarjung Hospital, Delhi, whereby the doctors at the said hospital opined that the defect is less than 5 mm, which does not require any surgical treatment.

¶20

Today, learned counsel appearing on behalf respondent has produced respondent ’ s ultrasound report of abdomen from Manglam Sonography Centre, Jaipur, Rajasthan and on perusal of the same, the said report seems to be contrary to the report submitted by Medical Board and Review

¶21

W.P.(C) 13100/2024 Page 2 of 4

¶22

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ROHIT KUMAR Signing Da te:2 1.09.2024 16:57

¶23

Medical Board.

¶24

In view of the controversy, vide order dated 10.05.2024, the learned Tribunal disposed of OA No.599/2024 preferred by the respondent herein by directing the petitioners that the re-medical examination of respondent be undertaken within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the order. Learned Tribunal further directed petitioners to convey the decision to the respondent and if he is found to be fit, further action be taken in accordance with law.

¶25

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that in case the respondent is again examined by the same set of doctors, he may be prejudiced by their decision.

¶26

In view of the above, as prayed by learned counsel for the respondent, to rule out any prejudice, the respondent be examined from R.R. Hospital, Delhi.

¶27

This Court accepts her request, therefore, we hereby modify the order dated 10.05.2024 passed by learned Tribunal and direct the petitioners to facilitate the respondent to get himself examined from R.R. Hospital.

¶28

The competent authority of R.R. Hospital is directed to constitute a Medical Board to examine the respondent on 09.10.2024 or on any subsequent date, as per their convenience but without delay.

¶29

The respondent shall appear before the Medical Board to be constituted by R.R. Hospital on 09.10.2024. If the respondent is found fit by such Medical Board, the petitioners shall allow him to join the selection process.

¶30

W.P.(C) 13100/2024 Page 3 of 4

¶31

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ROHIT KUMAR Signing Da te:2 1.09.2024 16:57

¶32

It is agreed by learned counsel for the parties that the examination report prepared by the R.R. Hospital in respect of respondent shall be final and binding.

¶33

With aforesaid, the present petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications are disposed of as infructuous.

¶34

SURESH KUMAR KAIT, J

¶35

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J

¶36

SEPTEMBER 19, 2024 rk/r

¶37

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ROHIT KUMAR Signing Da te:2 1.09.2024 16:57

Staff Selection Commission and Ors. v. Teekam Singh Meena

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Staff Selection Commission and Ors. v. Teekam Singh Meena

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

Rakesh Kumar & Anr. Vs Harbans Gandhi & Ors.

Vikas Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi through Transport Commissioner

Rajender Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Rani Sharma Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Yogesh Paliwal Vs the Union of India & Ors.

Prashant Softwares Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.

Mohd. Shahzad Vs New Delhi Municipal Council

Aruna Tiku Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Staff Selection Commission and Ors. Vs Bheemsen

Satbir Swami Vs Ministry of Railways & Ors.

Shiv Shanker Sachan Vs Union of India and Anr.

Commissioner of Police Delhi and Ors. Vs Ram Khilari Ex Const

Suraksha Jagirdar Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Union of India & Anr. Vs Ravinder Kumar & Anr.