Staff Selection Commission & Ors. Vs Sankit Singh — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Staff Selection Commission & Ors. Vs Sankit Singh — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned Tribunal erred in allowing the respondent's O.A. and directing that he be medically re-examined by a fresh Medical Board (with appointment to follow if found fit), notwithstanding the Review Medical Board's 'unfit' declaration.

Court's answer

Though the respondent was referred for expert opinion to the Department of Dermatology, Lok Nayak Hospital, and the expert opinion confirmed he is medically 'fit' for the job, the Review Medical Board still declared him 'unfit' for appointment.

Ratio / Principle

On these facts, the learned Tribunal rightly directed the petitioners to have the respondent re-examined by a Medical Board, and this Court does not find any error in the Impugned Order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Navin Chawla & Manoj Jain, JJ.; judgment by Navin Chawla, J., Oral), 10.03.2025: Dismissed the writ petition (W.P.(C) 13052/2024 & CM APPL. 54459/2024) filed by the Staff Selection Commission challenging the Order dated 14.05.2024 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, in O.A. No.1327/2024 (Sh. Sankit Singh v. Staff Selection Commission and Ors.). The respondent, a candidate for Constable (Executive) in the Delhi Police Examination 2023 (Notification of 01.09.2023), cleared the Computer Based Examination and Physical Endurance and Measurement Test but was declared 'unfit' at the Detailed Medical Examination for a hypopigmented patch over the shin of the left tibia, and again 'unfit' by the Review Medical Board (white patches 6x3 cm on shin of left tibia) after dermatologists at Lok Nayak Hospital confirmed Vitiligo Vulgaris (Report dated 29.01.2024). The Court observed that the expert dermatological opinion had confirmed the respondent medically 'fit' for the job, that the Tribunal had rightly directed re-examination by a Medical Board (following its earlier judgment of 10.05.2024 in O.A. No.519/2024, Teekam Singh Meena v. SSC & Ors.), found no error in the Impugned Order, and accordingly dismissed the petition and pending application.

$~50

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of decision: 10.03.2025

W.P.(C) 13052/2024 STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr.Premtosh K. Mishra , CGSC with Mr.Manish Vashist and Ms.Sanya Kalsi, Advs.

versus

SANKIT SINGH .....Respondent Through: Mr.Kawirangbou Charenamei, Mr.Jalaj Panwar and Mr.Virendra Kumar Pandey, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)

W.P.(C) 13052/2024 & CM APPL. 54459/2024

This petition has been filed by the petitioners, challenging the Order dated 14.05.2024 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the „learned Tribunal‟) in the Original Application No.1327/2024 (O.A.) titled Sh. Sankit Singh v. Staff Selection Commission and Ors. , allowing the said O.A. filed by the respondent herein and directing the petitioners herein to have the respondent medically re-examined and, if found fit, to take further action for his appointment in accordance with law.

Signature Not Verified

W.P.(C) 13052/2024

Page 1 of 3

Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Da te:1 7.03.2025 16:12:12

The respondent, pursuant to a Notification issued on 01.09.2023 for the post of Constable (Executive) Male and Female in the Delhi Police Examination 2023, applied for the said post. Upon clearing the Computer Based Examination and the Physical Endurance and Measurement Test, the respondent appeared for the Detailed Medical Examination, wherein he was declared „unfit‟ for appointment on the following grounds: -

“Hypopigmented patch over shin of Tibia (Left)”

The respondent was then referred to the Department of Dermatology, Lok Nayak Hospital, New Delhi, where the respondent was confirmed to be suffering from “ Vitiligo Vulgaris ”, vide a Report dated 29.01.2024. Consequently, the respondent was declared „unfit‟ by the Review Medical Board on the following grounds: -

“White Patches in 6x3 cm on shin of Left Tibia”

Aggrieved by the same, the respondent had filed the above O.A. before the learned Tribunal, which came to be allowed by the learned Tribunal, following its earlier Judgment dated 10.05.2024, passed in O.A. No.519/2024 titled Teekam Singh Meena v. SSC & Ors. .

We find that though the respondent had been referred to the Department of Dermatology, Lok Nayak Hospital, New Delhi, for an expert opinion, and the said expert opinion confirmed that he is medically „fit‟ for the job, the Review Medical Board still declared the respondent „unfit‟ for appointment.

In these facts, the learned Tribunal, in our opinion, has rightly directed the petitioners to have the respondent re-examined by a

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 13052/2024 By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Da te:1 7.03.2025 16:12:12

Page 2 of 3

Medical Board. We, therefore, do not find any error in the Impugned Order.

The petition along with the pending application is, accordingly, dismissed.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

MANOJ JAIN, J

MARCH 10, 2025/sg/DG

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 13052/2024 By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Da te:1 7.03.2025 16:12:12

Page 3 of 3