VIKASH CHOUDHARY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Shri Vikash Choudhary, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash the orders dated 1 st February 2020 and 16th October 2020 whereby the petitioner was found medically unfit and for directions to the respondent No.1/Union of India, respondent No.2/DG CRPF and respondent No.3/Staff Selection Commission to allow the petitioner to be medically examined by an Independent Board in R & R Hospital and direct his appointment if found fit.

(2.) The petitioner had, responded to the advertisement dated 21st July 2018 of the respondent No.3/Staff Selection Commission inviting online applications to participate in the examination for the recruitment of Constables (General Duty) in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), NIA & SSF and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles (AR). He successfully cleared the written exam on 14th February 2019 and cleared the Physical Efficiency Test (PET). Subsequently, he was called for medical examination on 31st January 2020 and was declared medically unfit due to 'eye squint' and 'knock knee more than 5cm'. Aggrieved therefrom the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appeal Medical Board requesting for Re-Medical Examination, as he was confident that he was not suffering from any disability. On 15th October 2020, the petitioner appeared before the Appeal Medical Board, but was again declared medically unfit the same day on the ground that he had 'knock knees more than 5 cms'. Dissatisfied with these findings, the petitioner got himself medically examined on 31st October 2020 at V.M.M.C. & Safdarjung Hospital New Delhi where the Senior Resident, Central Institute of Orthopaedics on examination found him without any disability.

(3.) The ld. counsel for the petitioner has pressed that in the light of such contradictory findings of the Medical Boards of the respondents and the Doctor of Safdarjung Hospital, this was a fit case where this Court should direct the respondents to get the petitioner re-examined by an Orthopaedic Specialist as it was a matter of his future. The ld counsel has also placed reliance on a number of judgements placed in the e-paperbook as Annexure P- 4 to P -9 allowing such requests for a re-medical examination.