Subject : Appointment O.A.No. 203/00284/2017 Page 1 of 6
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH
CIRCUIT SITTINGS BILASPUR
Original Application No.203/00284/2017 Jabalpur, this Friday, the 10thday of February, 2023 HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI KUMAR RAJESH CHANDRA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER Ashish Kumar Bambeshwar, S/o Gore Lal, Aged about 28 years, R/o House No. 74, Ward No. 19, MainRoad, Old Market, Dalli Rajhara PO, District Balod, CG State, Pin 491228.
-Applicant
(By Advocate - Shri P Chetan Kumar, proxy counsel for Shri Pramod Ramteke)
V e r s u s
1. Bhilai Steel Plant, through Managing Director, Bhilai Steel Plant, Bhilai, Durg Dist., CG State.
2. The Sr. Manager (P-Recruitment) Bhilai Steel Plant, Shed No. 3-A, CEZ Complex, Near Equipment Chowk, Bhilai, Durg Dist., CG State
3. Arun Kumar, HVD Driver (Trainee) &
4. Amit Mukherjee, HVD Driver (Trainee) Both C/o Sr. Manager (Recruitment) Bhilai Steel Plant, Shed No. 3-A, CEZ Complex, Near Equipment Chowk, Bhilai, Durg Dist. CG State
- Respondents
(By Advocate- Shri Sandeep Dubey)
(Date of reserving order: 11.01.2023)
1
Page 2 of 6
Order By Shri Kumar Rajesh Chandra, AM. The Original application has been filed by the applicant against the impugned orders dated 17.09.2016 (Annexure A/4) and 20.03.2017 (Annexure A/6), wherein the applicant had been declared unfit by the medical board of Bhilai and further seeks direction to the respondents to send him for medical examination as to his suitability to drive vehicles to the Government Medical Board.
2. Briefly, stated facts of the case as projected in the Original Application are that the applicant applied for the post of Attendant- cum-Technician (HVD) having requisite qualifications. After being successful in the written test (Annexure A/2), he was shortlisted for interview and was called for interview on 28.04.2016 vide annexure A/3. After being successful in written test and interview, he was called for medical examination, thereafter he was called for pre- employment medical examination on 17.09.2016, but was declared unfit by the Medical Board of Bhilai Steel Plant vide Annexure A/4 as his thumb was amputated. The applicant submitted an application for re-medical examination as he was issued a valid driving licence by the RTO for driving Heavy Vehicle. Further, in the re-medical examination held on 24.10.2016, he was again declared unfit for the post of HVD. The applicant also submitted that his right hand thumb
Page 3 of 6
is not completely cut off and it can work as original thumb and he has no difficulty in driving vehicles as he had been driving vehicles. After rejection of candidature of the applicant, the respondents again called certain candidates for appointment to the post of HVD and still there are 2/3 posts of HVD still lying vacant with the respondents. The applicant further submitted that he is driver possessing a valid driving licence to drive Heavy Vehicles issued by the RTO who is competent to issue such licences and if he were medically unfit to drive heavy vehicles, the RTO would not have issued him a Driving Licence. He seeks medical examination as to his suitability to drive vehicles to the Government Medical Board.
3. The respondents have filed their reply, wherein it has been submitted by the respondents that the medical standards in the advertisement no. 131 (Rectt.) 15-16 dated 05.08.2015 stipulates the following:
"Candidate should be of sound physique, free from any defect. The medical standards indicated above are minimum pre-requisite. However, the appointment of selected candidates will be subject to their passing the Company's Medical Examination as per standards laid down under SAIL's Medical and Health Manual."
Furthermore, according to regulations under SAIL's Medical and Health Manual 1992 for Medical examination of candidates under clause 6.1.3 that to be considered fit for employment, the candidate
Page 4 of 6
should be in good physical and mental health and should be able to perform his job effectively. The respondents further submitted that the applicant was asked to appear for pre-employment Medical Examination where he was declared "unfit" by the Pre-Employment Medical Board of the Company. That on his request for Re-Medical examination, he was again declared "unfit" by the Pre-Employment Review Medical Board held on 07.03.2017 and accordingly it was communicated by letter dated 20.03.2017 that on account of his unfitness as declared by Pre-Employment Review Medical Board, his candidature for the post of ACT (T) HVD cannot be considered. Further the respondents also submitted that the other candidates were offered appointment after being declared fit by the Medical Officers.
4. The applicant also submitted rejoinder, wherein he has reiterated his earlier stand as submitted in the Original Application and also submitted that RTO certifies the applicant to be fit to drive vehicles and issues a valid driving license and the respondents contend that the applicant is unfit to work as a driver in their establishment. Both these do not go together and therefore he seeks a strict scrutiny of the contention of the respondents as it is prejudicial not only to the applicant but also the powers of RTO to issue a valid driving license. Further the applicant is also willing to undergo a medical test to confirm his fitness for driving the vehicle by the
Page 5 of 6
District Medical Board and both the parties may be satisfied with that medical report.
5. This Tribunal has considered the matter and perused the documents annexed herewith the Original Application.
6. It is apparent from the record that after being successful in written test and interview, the applicant was called for pre- employment medical examination on 17.09.2016, but was declared unfit by the Medical Board of Bhilai Steel Plant. Also the re-medical examination of the applicant was done on 24.10.2016, but he was again declared unfit for the HVD post. The re-medical examination of the applicant was conducted by the Doctors being specialists in their field and it was opined that there is a deformity to the extent of 25 % in the right thumb of the applicant and hence, he was not recommended by the medical board. Therefore, keeping in view the report submitted by the medical board, the respondents have not found the applicant fit for the post applied for, i.e. HVD as the notification itself stipulates that the candidate has to be free of any defect. In any case, the applicant has not been selected for PWD category. The basic requirement as per the notification is that the candidate should be of sound physique, free from any defect and the medical standards prescribed therein are minimum pre-requisite. The
Page 6 of 6
notification further makes it clear that the appointment of selected candidates will be subject to their passing the Company's Medical Examination as per standards laid down under SAIL's Medical and Health Manual. Since in the instant case, the applicant has not been found fit as per the prescribed medical standards even after medical re-examination, we are not inclined to interfere with the opinion of medical experts leading to applicant's disqualification for the said post.
7. Accordingly this Original Application is dismissed being devoid of any merit. No order as to costs. (Kumar Rajesh Chandra) (Akhil Kumar Srivastava) Administrative Member Judicial Member
VK/-