Staff Selection Commission (Hdqrs) & Anr. Vs Dhruv Narayan Dwivedi

The present writ petition is filed against the order dated 03.09.2024 (hereafter ‘ impugned order ’) passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal (‘ CAT ’), Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A. No. 3425/2024.

¶12

O.A. No. 3425/2024 filed by the respondent was disposed of by the learned CAT with the following directions:

¶13

“In view of the above submissions, the OA is allowed and the respondents are directed to allow the applicant to appear for the re-review medical examination to be conducted by them as per the directions issued by this Tribunal in OA 1857/2024 and also in the present case.”

¶14

The learned counsel representing the respondent submits that in

¶15

an identical situation wherein the respondent was alleged to be suffering from “pectus excavatum”, the Division Bench has upheld the

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

W.P.(C) 7921/2025

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/01/2026 at 11:42:25

¶20

order passed by the learned CAT directing re-examination of the respondent. Paragraph 7 of the order passed in the Staff Selection Commission and Others vs. Rajesh : 2024 SCC OnLine Del 8404 is extracted as under:

¶21

“7. In the present case, the respondent had relied upon the report received from the Safdarjung Hospital, which had cleared the respondent herein of all the medical disqualification attributed to him by the Review Medical Board, that is, ‘pectus excavatum’. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the respondent has been rightly granted a fair opportunity to demonstrate to the petitioners that he does not really suffer with the alleged medical disqualification. We, however, direct that, in case, in the medical board proceedings it is found that the respondent does in fact suffer from the same disqualification, his case should not be processed further by the petitioners for appointment and such medical opinion shall not be open for further challenge by the respondent.”

¶22

In the present case as well, the respondent was declared unfit for the post of Delhi Police Constable (Executive) Male on account of him suffering from ‘pectus excavatum’. Upon the review medical examination conducted on 24.01.2024, a similar opinion was rendered by the doctors. Thereafter, the respondent got himself medically examined from another government hospital where he was found to be medically fit.

¶23

It is pertinent to note that the correctness of the order passed in Staff Selection Commission and Others vs. Rajesh (supra) has not been challenged and the directions have also been complied with.

¶24

The learned counsel representing the respondent submits that the subject specialist was not a member of the Medical Board or the Review Medical Board, and the same could also not be disputed by the learned counsel representing the petitioners.

¶25

Page 2 of 3

¶26

W.P.(C) 7921/2025

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/01/2026 at 11:42:25

¶29

In view of the aforesaid, this Court does not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order.

¶30

The present petition is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications also stand disposed of.

¶31

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J

¶32

AMIT MAHAJAN, J

¶33

JANUARY 7, 2026 “SK”

¶34

Page 3 of 3

¶35

W.P.(C) 7921/2025

¶36

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/01/2026 at 11:42:25

Staff Selection Commission (Hdqrs) & Anr. v. Dhruv Narayan Dwivedi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Staff Selection Commission (Hdqrs) & Anr. v. Dhruv Narayan Dwivedi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N. K. Bagrodia Public School, Dwarka, & Anr. Vs Directorate of Education & Anr.

Sunil Sharma Vs Rail Land Development Authority & Anr.

Rwa, Nangal Dewat Vs Delhi Development Authority and Ors.

Akhilesh Kumar Jain and Ors. Vs Registrar of Societies and Ors.

Riyazuddin Vs Jamia Millia Islamia & Anr.

Churchill Brothers Sports Club Pvt. Ltd. Vs All India Football Federation & Anr.

Ajay Kumar Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Nikita Anand Vs the Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Vikash Khatri Vs the Comptroller and Auditor General of India & Anr.

Surjit Singh & Ors. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Union of India & Ors. Vs Vijender Singh

Gajendra Singh Vs Union of India

Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors. Vs Constable Vijay Pal

Canara Bank Vs Sh. Vikas Kumar Singh