Full Judgment Text
$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 6203/2017
CHANDAN KUMAR SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through: Major K.Ramesh, Advocate
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Bhagvan Swarup Shukla, CGSC
with Mr.Kamaldeep & Mr.Suraj
Kumar, Advocates for UOI
CORAM:
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
O R D E R
% 18.01.2018
1. The petitioner has filed this petition praying inter alia for quashing
and setting aside the letter dated 21.06.2017, issued by the respondents,
rejecting his request for another medical examination, with regard to his
disability of ‘squint & colour blindness’ on the ground that no such
procedure of conducting another medical examination after declaring him
unfit by the Specialist after a review at the Military Hospital and in terms of
the given policy. The petitioner also seeks directions to the respondents to
have him re-examined at the Army R & R Hospital, Delhi for the disabilities
on which he has been declared unfit by them.
W.P.(C) 6203/2017 Page 1 of 4
2. The facts of the present case are that in September, 2016, the
petitioner had applied for enrolment in the Indian Army. After undergoing a
primary medical examination on 17.01.2017, the petitioner was found unfit
on account of suffering from ‘squint & colour blindness’ . Aggrieved by the
aforesaid report, on 7.04.2017, the petitioner submitted an application for a
Review Medical Board which was turned down vide letters dated 29.05.2017
and 21.06.2017.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that thereafter, the
petitioner had got himself independently examined at a private hospital
namely Dr.Amrendra Hospital, Aara, Bihar by one Dr.Amrendra Anand, Eye
and ENT Specialist who had cleared him of both the disabilities namely
‘squint and colour blindness’ .
4. Having perused the aforesaid document filed by the petitioner with the
petition as Annexure P-3, we find that the name, age and address of the
patient have been scored out and there are several over-writings. The said
report does not bear the seal or the signatures of the doctor who had
allegedly examined the petitioner. The veracity of the said document is
highly suspect and cannot be relied on.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in all fairness, even if the
report submitted by the petitioner, from a private hospital, is not taken into
consideration, a perusal of the petitioner’s first medical test undertaken on
17.01.2017 reveals that part-II had not been completed by any one of the
three specialists, as the columns are blank. Further, the Review Certificate
of the petitioner filed by the respondents does not indicate the opinion
expressed by the GD Specialist (Ophthalmology) on examining the
petitioner. He submits that the only request is that the respondents be
W.P.(C) 6203/2017 Page 2 of 4
directed to refer the petitioner to the Army R & R Hospital, Delhi for a
medical examination and the petitioner shall accept the said report as final
and binding.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents disputes the submission made by
the other side that no Specialist had examined the petitioner on 16.08.2017.
He states that the face of the Review Certificate of the petitioner filed along
with the counter affidavit and marked as Annexure R-1, does not clearly
indicate that any specialist had examined him, but the reverse of the said
Certificate bears the seal and signatures of the GD Specialist
(Ophthalmology).
7. We have perused the reverse side of the Review Certificate and the
original records handed over by the learned counsel for the respondents in
the course of arguments but we find that the reverse side of the said
Certificate only bears a seal and signatures of the Eye Specialists and there
are no remarks, of any nature above that.
8. In such circumstances, we deem it appropriate to allow the present
petition by directing the respondents to approach the Army R & R Hospital,
Delhi for constituting a Board of Members that shall include an Eye
Specialist for conducting the petitioner’s medical examination in respect of
the disabilities mentioned above. The date and time for the petitioner to
appear before the Board to be constituted by the Army R & R Hospital,
Delhi shall be intimated by the respondents within four weeks and his
medical examination shall be conducted within two weeks thereafter. If the
opinion of the Medical Board is in favour of the petitioner, then the
respondent shall appoint him subject to his meeting the eligibility criteria. It
is agreed by the parties that the decision of the Medical Board constituted by
W.P.(C) 6203/2017 Page 3 of 4
the Army R & R Hospital, Delhi shall be final and binding.
9. The petition is disposed of.
HIMA KOHLI, J.
REKHA PALLI, J.
JANUARY 18, 2018
‘hkaur’
W.P.(C) 6203/2017 Page 4 of 4