LAWS(DLH)-2004-10-83

RAJIV SHARMA Vs. STATE OF DELHI

Decided On October 11, 2004
RAJIV SHARMA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF DELHI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed the present writ petition, seeking quashing of order dated 17.8.2004, directing the him to appear for medical examination under Rule 2(2) of the CCS Medical Examination Rules, 1957. Petitioner claims that on account of his difference with respondent No.2, he is being victimised. Petitioner had been earlier directed to appear for a medical examination before a Medical Board. He appeared on 22.6.2004, when he was examined and some tests carried out. The result of these test was not made available, as the petitioner, it is stated, was not examined by the Psychiatrist. Petitioner objected to this examination as being contrary to CCS Medical Examination Rules, 1957, as the approval of the Competent Authority had not been taken. Subsequently, approval of the Competent Authority had been obtained for examination and he had been asked to appear before the Medical Board in the LNJP Hospital. Petitioner lastly received an intimation for appearance before the Medical Board on 14.9.2004. Petitioner had sought deferment.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that when the matter was last taken up with the Competent Authority, to the best of knowledge of the petitioner, could not have had any material before it, so as to direct the petitioner's medical examination in terms of the Rules. He submits that there is no medical record, which the Competent Authority could have sent to the Medical Board, as contemplated in some of the decisions taken by the Government. In these circumstances, the records of the case had been called for, especially with regard to the approval been given by the Competent Authority for the examination. The records have been perused by me.

(3.) The Competent Authority took note of the incident, which had taken place in the office of Chief Electoral Officer on 3.10.2003, which led to the petitioner filing complaints before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. The allegations of man handling of the petitioner have been made in the complaint. It was noted that thereafter petitioner has been sending number of representations addressed to various authorities. Based on inputs from different departments, the authorities felt that petitioner was in a disturbed state of mind and required medical help and he was shifted to a non-sensitive department.