Writ petition dismissed. Court held that recovery from an ailment subsequent to the completion of the selection process is of no consequence for deciding fitness required for appointment.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR.
O R D E R
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13928/2013
Prem Prakash Regar v. Central Administrative Tribunal, Bench at Jodhpur & Ors.
Date of Order :: 23rd February, 2015
P R E S E N T
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR
Mr. K.K.Shah, for the petitioner. Mr. Kamal Dave, for the respondents.
BY THE COURT :
Pursuant to an advertisement dated 26.6.2004 the petitioner applicant faced a process of selection for the purpose of appointment to the post of Diesel/Electrical Assistant. On being selected, an offer of appointment as Diesel/Electrical Assistant was made subject to his medical fitness. On 3.10.2006 the petitioner was declared medically unfit in A-1 category, hence effect was not given to the order of appointment. Subsequent thereto the petitioner availed surgery and he recovered from the ailment on basis of which he was declared medically unfit.
On being recovered he claimed for appointment as Diesel/Electrical Assistant by way of submitting a representation. The petitioner was subjected to medical examination at All India Institute of Medical Sciences and
-2-
opinion was also obtained from other medical authorities, according to which he was fulfilling necessary medical fitness as per the criteria settled to hold the post concerned. Despite repeated representations no appointment was accorded to the petitioner, therefore, he approached the Central Administrative Tribunal by way of filing Original Application that came to be rejected by judgment impugned dated 24.9.2013. Learned Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that as per para 523 of the Indian Railway Medical Manual, 2000, the original applicant was not possessing the requisite medical fitness and, therefore, appointment was rightly denied to him.
In this petition for writ the only argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner after being declared unfit availed necessary surgery and recovered from the ailment, as such the respondents should have provided appointment to him.
We do not find any merit in the argument advanced. It is the position admitted that during process of selection the petitioner was suffering from an ailment and looking to that as per para 523 of the Indian Railway Medical Manual, 2000 he was not found fit to be employed as Diesel/Electrical Assistant. His recovery from the ailment concerned is of no consequence being subsequent to the completion of the process of selection in question. Learned Tribunal, thus, in our opinion did not commit any error that may warrant interference of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
-3-
The writ petition is dismissed accordingly.
(JAISHREE THAKUR),J. (GOVIND MATHUR),J.
Mathuria.KK/PS
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a respondent can be appointed after recovery from an ailment discovered post-selection process.
Whether the impugned order of the Central Administrative Tribunal refusing appointment warrants interference under Articles 226 and 227.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Prem Prakash Regar
Central Administrative Tribunal, Bench at Jodhpur
Ors.
GOVIND MATHUR
JAISHREE THAKUR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
