Nayanjyoti Deka Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

2. The petitioner in the present writ petition has presented a challenge to an order dated 30.11.2018, by which he was declared to be medically unfit for recruitment against the post of Constable for which he was selected in pursuance to a recruitment process held for the same.

¶25

3. The petitioner, herein, had appeared in a recruitment rally held in the month of February, 2018. The petitioner had successfully completed the various stages of the selection process but had failed in the medical examination held on 19.02.2018. The petitioner was thereafter, referred to the 155 Base Hospital, Shillong, for review, wherein, he was declared fit. The petitioner was then issued with an admit card for attending the All India Common Entrance Examination, schedule on 29.04.2018. The petitioner had successfully completed the said examination and his name found place in

¶26

Page No.# 3/7

¶27

the merit list so published. The petitioner was thereafter, provisionally selected for the post of Constable (General Duty).

¶28

In the said communication dated 31.05.2018, it was stipulated that his selection was subject to verification of his documents and being medically fit and, if required, to undergo a medical re-examination after 180 (one hundred eighty) days. As there was a delay in taking the procedure forwarded and more than 180 (one hundred eighty) days had lapsed since the date of his medical examination during the recruitment rally and the date on which he was to be dispatched for training, the petitioner was again subjected to re-medical examination by the Recruiting Medical Officer. On such reexamination of the petitioner, the petitioner was found to be suffering from “Varicose Veins” on his left leg. The said disability being detected, the petitioner was referred to the Senior Recruiting Medical Officer Headquarters Recruiting Zones (North Eastern States), Shillong, for further examination. The petitioner, was thereafter reviewed by the graded Specialist Surgeon at Military Hospital, Shillong, and he was then declared medically unfit for recruitment of the Force on account of the said disability.

¶29

Being aggrieved, the petitioner has instituted the present writ petition.

¶30

4. Mr. I. Alam, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner, after reiterating the facts, noticed, hereinabove, has submitted that the petitioner at the time of his medical examination during the recruitment rally was not detected to be suffering from any disability including the disability of “Varicose Veins” on his left leg. He submits that on account of a delay occasioning in the matter, the petitioner was subjected to re-medical examination. On his such re-medical examination, the petitioner was declared to be

¶31

Page No.# 4/7

¶32

unfit on account of having “Varicose Veins on his left leg”. It is submitted that the said re-medical examination conducted on the petitioner and the reports as obtained by the Respondent Authorities had been conducted without the knowledge of the petitioner and the petitioner was not afforded with an opportunity to make a claim for being examined by a Specialized Civil Doctor.

¶33

5. Mr. I. Alam, further submits that the manner in which the petitioner was subjected to a re-medical examination and the reports as obtained in the matter by the Respondent Authorities leading to the cancellation of his candidature, the petitioner was required to be afforded an opportunity to have himself medically examined before a competent Doctor practicing in the Civil Hospital. Accordingly, he submits that this Court would be pleased to direct the Respondent Authorities to have a review medical examination of the petitioner and by incorporating in the panel of Doctors so prepared a Specialist from a Civil Hospital.

¶34

6. Per contra, Ms. B. Sarma, learned CGC, appearing for the respondents, has submitted that a lapse of more than 180 days having occasioned since the date of the medical examination of the petitioner during his recruitment rally, the petitioner was mandated to be subjected to a further review medical examination in terms of the directives operating in this connection. It is submitted that the petitioner on being examined by the Recruiting Medical Officer, the petitioner was found to be suffering from “Varicose Veins” on his left leg. The petitioner accordingly, was thereafter, forwarded to the 155 Base Hospital, for a further examination by a Specialist Doctor. The petitioner on being examined by the Specialist Doctor at 155 Base Hospital, it was affirmed that the petitioner suffered from “Varicose Veins” on his left leg and

¶35

Page No.# 5/7

¶36

accordingly, the petitioner was held to be unfit for recruitment to the Force. She submits that the said aspect of the matter was duly communicated to the petitioner vide a communication dated 30.11.2018.

¶37

7. Ms. B. Sarma, learned CGC, submits that the disability detected in respect of the petitioner would have the effect of hindering the completion by him of his training programme and accordingly, the petitioner was found to be unfit for recruitment to the Force. She submits that the opinion submitted by the Specialist Doctor of the respondents, would require to be affirmed, inasmuch as, only persons fit in all respects would be mandated to be recruited to the Force. Accordingly, she submits that the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner would not mandate an interference from this Court.

¶38

8. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials brought on record.

¶39

9. The petitioner initially, during the recruitment rally on medical examination, was found to be medically fit. However, on completion of the recruitment process and the petitioner having been placed in the merit list, the petitioner now being required to be deputed for undergoing training, a letter in connection was issued to him on 31.05.2018. In the said letter, it was stipulated that he would be deputed for undergoing the training subject to verification of his documents and he being found to be physically fit at the time of his dispatch to the training centre. A period of 180 days having lapsed since the petitioner was medical examined during the recruitment rally and the date on which the petitioner had appeared before the Respondent Authorities,

¶40

Page No.# 6/7

¶41

in pursuance to the communication dated 31.05.2018, for being dispatch to the training centre, the petitioner was subjected to a review medical examination. The Recruiting Medical Officer, on examining the petitioner, found that the petitioner was suffering from “Varicose Veins” on his left leg. Accordingly, the Recruitment Officer had referred the petitioner to 155 Base Hospital of the Force. The petitioner was examined in the 155 Base Hospital by a Specialist and it was affirmed that the petitioner was infact suffering from “Varicose Veins” on his left leg. Accordingly, the Specialist Doctor examining the petitioner opined the petitioner to be unfit for recruitment to the Force.

¶42

10. The said opinion having been received by the Respondent Authorities, the Force authority issued a communication dated 30.11.2011, to the petitioner cancelling his candidature on being found to be medically unfit on his medical re-examination. While the petitioner has assailed the cancellation of his candidature effected vide the communication dated 30.11.2018, which is based on the opinion rendered in the matter by the Doctors examining him during his re-medical examination, the petitioner had not brought on record any material to demonstrate that at the relevant point of time, he was not suffering from any disability including the disability identified by the Doctors examining him during his medical re-examination. In the appeal submitted by the petitioner against the communication dated 30.11.2018, the petitioner had also not highlighted the fact that the petitioner was not suffering from “Varicose Veins” on his left leg. The Respondent Authorities having found the petitioner to be not fit for recruitment to the Force on account of suffering from “Varicose Veins” on his left leg, this Court would not sit on appeal over such opinion rendered by a Specialist in the matter in absence of any material being brought on record by the petitioner to dispute

¶43

Page No.# 7/7

¶44

the said opinion rendered in his case by the Doctors examining him during his medical re-examination.

¶45

11. It is a settled position of law that it is only a person found fully fit, who would be eligible to be recruited to the Force, in question, and in the event, any candidate is found to be medically unfit, it is not for this Court to sit on appeal and substitute its views, in place of the opinion rendered in the matter by the Specialist of the Force, in question, more so in absence of any material brought on record by the petitioner to dispute such view taken by a Specialist Doctor of the Force. It is also a settled position of law that the decision taken in a re-medical examination of candidate by a competent authority of the Force should be treated as final.

¶46

12. Accordingly, the cancellation of the candidature of the petitioner being on account of the disability suffered by the petitioner which was detected during his medical re-examination, this Court is of the considered view that the communication dated 30.11.2018, would not mandate an interference from this Court.

¶47

13. Accordingly, the claim made by the petitioner in the present writ petition is held to be devoid of any merit and the same consequently stands dismissed.

¶48

JUDGE

¶49

Comparing Assistant

Nayanjyoti Deka v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nayanjyoti Deka v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

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

Pabin Ch. Boro Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Bupen Brahma Alias Bhupen Brahma Vs the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Bilal Uddin Mazumder Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Abdul Salam Barbhuiya Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Mrs Manowara Begum Vs Smti Binita Kalita and Ors.

Manoranjan Das Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.