- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
SHRI. ARUN S/O. DUNDAPPA GOLABHAVI v. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE
Factual and Procedural Background
The petitioner applied for appointment to the post of Constable (GD) in CAPFS, NIA, SSF and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles pursuant to a recruitment notification by the Staff Selection Commission. He qualified the physical standard and physical efficiency tests held in September 2019. However, upon medical examination on 27.01.2020, he was declared medically unfit due to alleged knock knee. A review medical examination on 03.10.2020 reaffirmed the finding of unfitness due to knock knee by the 2nd respondent-Board. Contradicting this, a District Surgeon at BIMS Hospital, Belagavi issued a certificate stating the medical board's report was an error of judgment, finding no symptoms of knock knee or hypertension. Despite this, the respondents maintained the petitioner as unfit, leading to the filing of this writ petition challenging the medical board’s decision.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the petitioner should be re-examined by an independent or alternative medical board in light of the conflicting medical reports.
- Whether the respondents are bound to reconsider the petitioner’s medical fitness for appointment based on the divergent medical opinion provided by the District Surgeon.
Arguments of the Parties
Petitioner’s Arguments
- Due to the conflicting medical findings, the petitioner requested that he be examined by an independent medical board, preferably a government hospital, to reassess his medical fitness for the post of Constable.
Respondents’ Arguments
- There is no provision in the recruitment notification permitting referral of the petitioner to an independent medical board.
- However, in view of a Division Bench decision in W.A.No.100046-100050/2020 and connected matters, the petitioner’s case will be re-evaluated by the CRPF Medical Board considering the District Surgeon’s medical report.
Table of Precedents Cited
| Precedent | Rule or Principle Cited For | Application by the Court |
|---|---|---|
| W.A.No.100046-100050/2020 and connected matters (Division Bench) | Guidelines for re-evaluation of medical fitness by CRPF Medical Board considering independent medical reports. | The Court directed that the petitioner’s medical fitness be re-evaluated by the CRPF Medical Board in light of the District Surgeon’s report, consistent with the guidelines applied uniformly across the country. |
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The Court noted the conflicting medical reports: the initial medical board declared the petitioner unfit due to knock knee, while the District Surgeon’s certificate contradicted this finding. The Court referred to the Division Bench’s prior ruling in W.A.No.100046-100050/2020, which established uniform guidelines for re-evaluation of candidates’ medical fitness by the CRPF Medical Board, taking into account independent medical opinions. Applying this precedent, the Court concluded that the petitioner’s medical fitness must be reconsidered by the CRPF Medical Board with due regard to the District Surgeon’s report. The Court emphasized adherence to the established procedural framework and uniform application of medical fitness guidelines nationwide.
Holding and Implications
DISPOSED OF
The Court ordered the petitioner to report to the CRPF Hospital for re-evaluation by the CRPF Medical Board within four weeks, directing the Board to consider the District Surgeon’s medical report in its assessment. If found fit, the petitioner’s seniority shall be fixed in the batch in which he qualified. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. This decision impacts the parties directly by mandating a re-assessment of medical fitness but does not establish new legal precedent beyond reaffirming adherence to the Division Bench’s earlier guidelines.
Pursuant to the recruitment notification issued by the Staff Selection Commission, the petitioner submitted an application with the 2nd respondent to consider his claim for appointment to the post of Constable (GD) in CAPFS, NIA, SSF and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Riffles.
2. Petitioner participated in the physical standard test and physical efficiency test during September -2019 and in the said test, the petitioner was qualified. The petitioner was also examined by the Medical Officer on 27.01.2020 and he was declared as medically unfit on account of alleged normal knee alignment, no knock knee.
3. The petitioner appeared before the 4th respondent on 03.10.2020 for review medical examination and the 2nd respondent-Board thereafter issued a report holding that the petitioner is unfit on account of knock knee.
4. The petitioner after his initial/first medical examination conducted by respondent No.4, got medical examination by the District Surgeon, BIMS Hospital at Belagavi who issued a certificate stating that the report of medical examination conducted on 28.01.2020 by the respondent No.4 is an error of judgment on the ground that there is no symptom of Knock Knee on X-ray examination and there is no symptom of Hypertension. By virtue of this the medical disability of the petitioner has been overruled. Inspite of the same, the respondents have declared the petitioner as unfit. Being aggrieved by the certificate issued by the 2nd respondent-Board at Annexure-A, petitioner has filed this writ petition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in view of the divergent finding given by the District Surgeon Belagavi, the respondent may be directed to get the petitioner examined by the independent medical Board preferably, the Government Hospital and obtain a report and reconsider the candidature of the petitioner for appointment for the post of Constable.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that there is no provision in the notification which provides for referring the petitioner for medical examination before an independent medical board. He further submits that in view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.100046- 100050/2020 and other connected matters disposed of on 27.08.2020, the case of the petitioner shall be re-evaluated by CRPF Medical Board keeping in view the medical report submitted by the District Surgeon, BIMS Hospital Belagavi.
7. I have considered the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material on record.
8. The Division Bench of this Court by considering the guidelines which are applied uniformly through out the Country have directed the respondents therein to re-evaluate the medical fitness of the candidates by CRPF medical Board keeping in view the medical report submitted by the medical Board of Victoria Hospital, Bengaluru therein.
9. Hence, this writ petition also requires to be disposed of in the light of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.100046- 100050/2020 and other connected matters.
10. In view of the above, I pass the following: ORDER
(i) Petitioner shall report to the Administrative Officer of the CRPF Hospital on 27.09.2021. The CRPF Medical Board shall re-evaluate the petitioner keeping in view the medical report submitted by the District Surgeon, BIMS Hospital, Belagavi and take further decision in the matter.
(ii) The seniority of the candidate who is found fit by the CISF/CRPF Medical Board shall be fixed in the batch in which he has qualified.
(iii) The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of examination of the petitioner by the CISF/CRPF Medical Board.
(iv) Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE
Alert