AKHILESH KUMAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The petitioner applied for the post of constable under Rule 15 of the U.P. Police Constable and Head Constables Service Rules, 2008. The petitioner was required to undergo a physical standard test, physical efficiency test, medical examination and written examination. In accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Rule 15 of the aforesaid Rules, the petitioner was successful in the physical standard test and the physical efficiency test and thereafter he was required to appear before the Medical Board for his medical examination. The Medical Board also cleared him. The petitioner was thereafter issued a call letter to appear for the written examination in which the petitioner participated and cleared the written examination, but before he could be issued an appointment letter, some complaint was made that the petitioner is a handicapped person and has a physical defect which may interfere with the efficient performance of his duties as a constable. In the light of the said complaint, the petitioner was again directed to appear before the Medical Board. The Medical Board after re-examining the petitioner submitted a report dated 31st August, 2010 and opined that the physical deformity in left forefinger, which is cut upto the nails, does not make the petitioner a handicapped person and that the petitioner is fit for being given an appointment in Government service. In spite of this medical report being given in his favour, the competent authority issued an order dated 15th February, 2011 cancelling his appointment on the post of constable. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said order, has filed the present writ petition. The impugned order and the counter-affidavit indicates that the petitioner's claim for appointment on the post of constable has been rejected on the ground of physical deformity taking protection of Rule 13 of the Rules of 2008 which is extracted hereunder:--

(2.) From the aforesaid rule, it is clear that no candidate could be appointed in the service if he suffers from any physical defect which is likely to interfere with efficient performance of his duties. The rule further provides that before a candidate is finally approved for appointment, he shall be required to pass an examination of a Medical Board.

(3.) In the instant case, the petitioner has been cleared twice by the Medical Board and, in the second medical report, the Medical Board has given a clear opinion that the physical deformity in the petitioner's left forefinger does not constitute any kind of deformity nor does it make the petitioner a handicapped person. The Medical Board has further opined that the petitioner is fit for being given an appointment in a Government service.