No.G/3400451 Warrant Officer/Gd (General Duty) Pratap Singh vs Union Of India And 3 Ors

Page No.# 1/17
GAHC010172272024

2026:GAU-AS:12657
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4356/2024
NO.G/3400451 WARRANT OFFICER/GD (GENERAL DUTY) PRATAP SINGH
S/O- LATE RUP SINGH, PRESENTLY SERVING AS WARRANT OFFICER/GD
(GENERAL DUTY) AT 34TH ASSAM RIFLES, C/O 99 APO, PIN- 932034
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI- 110001
2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
ASSAM RIFLES
HEAD QUARTER DIRECTORATE GENERAL
ASSAM RIFLES
SHILLONG- 11
3:THE COMMANDER 27 SECTOR
ASSAM RIFLES
C/O 99 APO
4:THE COMMANDANT
34TH ASSAM RIFLES
C/O 99 APO
PIN- 93203
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR V KUMAR, MS M TIWARI,MR B PATHAK
Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. K K PARASAR (R-1 TO 4)

Page No.# 2/17
:::BEFORE:::
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE

Date on which judgment is reserved : N/A

Date of pronouncement of judgment : 02.09.2026

Whether the pronouncement is of the
Operative part of the judgment : N/A

Whether the full judgment has been
Pronounced : Yes


Judgment & Order (Oral)
Heard Mr. B. Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.
K. Parasar, learned CGC for the respondents.

2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for setting aside and
quashing the impugned promotion order dated nil (Annexed as Annexure-5 to
the writ petition), whereby his name was deleted from the promotion list for
promotion to the rank of Naib Subedar/GD and the communication dated
31.01.2024 whereby his claim for promotion was rejected. The petitioner has
further prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities to consider his
case for promotion to the rank of Naib Subedar/GD as per his seniority, with
effect from 29.05.2023.
3. The petitioner was enrolled in the Assam Rifles as Rifleman/GD on
23.06.1990. He was thereafter promoted to the rank of Havildar/GD on
12.04.2003 and subsequently to the rank of Warrant Officer/GD on 01.06.2011.

Page No.# 3/17
th
While serving with 34 Assam Rifles, the petitioner sustained a ballistic injury to
his brain during an operation against insurgents on 05.09.2009. The said injury
was declared attributable to Government service and the petitioner was placed
in medical category P2 (Permanent) on account of the said injury.
4. The petitioner was thereafter diagnosed with Primary Hypertension and
Diabetes Mellitus Type-II and was placed in low medical category P3 (T-24) with
effect from 02.07.2022. He was considered for promotion to the rank of Naib
Subedar/GD in DPC-2023. Since he was not fulfilling the prescribed medical
criteria at that stage, the DPC recommended his case subject to upgradation of
his medical category.
5. The petitioner was subsequently examined on 29.05.2023 by the Specialist
Medicine Officer, Border Security Force, who, after considering the control of his
blood pressure and blood sugar, recommended that he may be upgraded to
SHAPE-I, subject to continuance of medication and regular follow-up. Pursuant
thereto, a re-categorisation Medical Board was conducted on 26.06.2023 and
the petitioner was upgraded to P1/SHAPE-I for Primary Hypertension and
Diabetes Mellitus Type-II with effect from 29.05.2023. The petitioner thereafter
underwent his Annual Medical Examination on 22.07.2023 and was found in
medical category SHAPE-I.
6. In view of the upgradation of the petitioner’s medical category, the
respondent authorities issued an order dated 14.08.2023 promoting him to the
rank of Naib Subedar/GD, subject to his meeting the medical criteria on the date
of assuming the promoted rank. However, the petitioner was subsequently
examined by the medical authority and was declared unfit for promotion on
19.10.2023 on account of Primary Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus Type-II.

Page No.# 4/17
His promotion was thereafter kept in abeyance and his junior, who fulfilled the
prescribed promotional criteria, was promoted to the next higher rank.
7. The petitioner thereafter made several representations before the
respondent authorities for release of his promotion in accordance with his
seniority. He also served a legal notice dated 04.01.2024 seeking promotion to
the rank of Naib Subedar/GD with effect from 29.05.2023. The respondents
replied to the said legal notice vide communication dated 31.01.2024 stating
that the petitioner had come up for promotion in the year 2023 as per his
seniority and had met all the prescribed promotional qualitative requirements,
but was subsequently found medically unfit for promotion on account of Primary
Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus Type-II and, therefore, could not assume
the rank of Naib Subedar/GD. Being aggrieved by the denial of promotion, the
petitioner has preferred the present writ petition seeking the reliefs as stated
hereinabove.
8. Mr. B. Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner
had fulfilled all the prescribed promotional criteria and his name was duly
considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee. He submits that the only
impediment pointed out by the respondents was the petitioner’s medical
category and, upon his medical review, the competent Medical Board had
upgraded him to SHAPE-I with effect from 29.05.2023. Thereafter, the
respondents themselves issued the promotion order dated 14.08.2023 in favour
of the petitioner.
9. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner’s ballistic injury was sustained
while he was performing active duty during an operation against insurgents and
the injury was declared attributable to Government service. He submits that

Page No.# 5/17
paragraph 7 of Appendix-A to Record Office Instruction 04/2002 provides
relaxation of the mandatory SHAPE-I medical standard in cases of personnel
who have been wounded or injured while on active Government duty. The
petitioner had already been granted the benefit of the said provision in respect
of his operational injury and was earlier promoted to the rank of Warrant
Officer/GD despite being in medical category P2 (Permanent) on account of the
said injury.
10. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was not denied promotion on
account of his operational injury. His medical category for Primary Hypertension
and Diabetes Mellitus Type-II had been upgraded to SHAPE-I after a proper
medical examination. The Medical Board dated 26.06.2023 specifically recorded
the petitioner’s upgraded medical category with effect from 29.05.2023. He was
again found in SHAPE-I during the Annual Medical Examination conducted on
22.07.2023. Therefore, there was no justification for treating him as medically
unfit thereafter on the basis of the very same ailments.
11. Learned counsel further submits that the promotion order dated
14.08.2023 was issued after the petitioner’s medical category had already been
upgraded to SHAPE-I. Although the order required the petitioner to meet the
medical criteria on the date of assumption, such condition could not be applied
mechanically to defeat the petitioner’s promotion when there was no fresh
injury or illness between the medical examination by a Board which resulted in
his upgradation and the subsequent medical assessment by a Single Doctor
relied upon by the respondents.
12. Learned counsel submits that the respondents have not produced any
material to show that the petitioner suffered any fresh illness or that there was

Page No.# 6/17
any deterioration in his medical condition after he was found fit in SHAPE-I
during his Annual Medical Examination on 22.07.2023. The subsequent medical
fitness certificate dated 19.10.2023, that too by a Medical Officer, only refers to
Primary Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus Type-II, conditions which were
already known to the respondents and had been considered by the Medical
Board while upgrading the petitioner to SHAPE-I.

13. Learned counsel submits that the respondents subsequently issued
guidelines dated 02.08.2024 clarifying that the medical category ascertained
during AME/PME remains valid for a period of one year and that a fresh medical
examination for ascertaining the medical category is necessitated only upon
occurrence of a fresh injury or illness during the intervening period. He submits
that although the said guidelines were issued subsequently, they reflect the
reasonable manner in which the validity of an already ascertained medical
category is to be understood and cannot be ignored while considering the
petitioner’s case.
14. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has rendered more
than three decades of service in the Assam Rifles and is at the fag end of his
service career. He submits that denial of promotion despite his name having
been included in the promotion order and despite his having been found in
SHAPE-I by the competent Medical Board is arbitrary and caused serious
prejudice to him.
15. Learned counsel has also referred to the case of Rifleman/Store Keeper
Technician Ramakant Bhakoji, wherein promotion was granted after the
individual was found in SHAPE-I on the relevant date. He submits that the
petitioner’s case cannot be treated differently when his own medical category

Page No.# 7/17
had been upgraded to SHAPE-I with effect from 29.05.2023 and he was again
found in SHAPE-I during his Annual Medical Examination.
16. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors. v. Brigadier Javed Iqbal, 2022 SCC
OnLine SC 633 , decided on 17.05.2022. Relying upon the said decision, learned
counsel submits that where the medical condition of an employee has improved
and the competent Medical Board has found him fit, such subsequent
improvement in the medical condition cannot be ignored while considering his
entitlement to promotion. It is submitted that, in the present case also, the
petitioner’s medical condition was duly reviewed by the competent Medical
Board and he was upgraded to SHAPE-I, and there is no material to indicate
that he suffered any fresh injury or illness during the intervening period so as to
justify the subsequent denial of promotion.
17. Learned counsel submits that the action of the respondents in denying
promotion to the petitioner, despite his fulfilling the other promotional
requirements and despite his medical category having been upgraded to SHAPE-
I, is arbitrary and cannot be sustained. He, therefore, submits that the
impugned promotion order dated nil and the communication dated 31.01.2024
are liable to be set aside and the respondents ought to be directed to consider
and grant the petitioner promotion to the rank of Naib Subedar/GD in
accordance with his seniority.
18. Mr. K. K. Parasar, learned CGC for the respondents, submits that the
promotion of Assam Rifles personnel is governed by the Record Office
Instructions (RoI) 04/2002 and the Ministry of Home Affairs guidelines, under
which medical fitness is a mandatory criterion for promotion. He submits that

Page No.# 8/17
although relaxation of the SHAPE-I medical category is available to personnel
who have sustained injury during operational duties, such relaxation is confined
to the medical conditions arising from the operational casualty and does not
extend to other illnesses.
19. Learned CGC submits that the petitioner was placed in Low Medical
Category P3 (T-24) with effect from 02.07.2022 on account of Primary
Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus Type-II. The petitioner was thereafter
considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee for promotion to the rank
of Naib Subedar/GD, but as he did not meet the mandatory medical criteria, his
promotion was recommended subject to upgradation of his medical category.
20. Learned CGC submits that during the medical review conducted on
29.05.2023, the Specialist Medicine Officer of the Border Security Force
recommended that the petitioner may be upgraded to SHAPE-I on account of
good control of his blood pressure and glycemic condition, subject to continuous
medication and periodic review. On the basis of the said opinion, the duly
constituted Medical Board upgraded the petitioner to SHAPE-I for Primary
Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus Type-II with effect from 29.05.2023. The
petitioner thereafter underwent his Annual Medical Examination on 22.07.2023
and was found in SHAPE-I.
21. Learned CGC submits that taking into consideration the upgradation of the
petitioner’s medical category, the Headquarters Directorate General Assam Rifles
issued the promotion order dated 14.08.2023 promoting the petitioner to the
rank of Naib Subedar/GD, subject to his meeting the medical criteria of SHAPE-I
on the date of assumption of the rank. He submits that the issuance of the
promotion order did not dispense with the requirement of medical fitness at the

Page No.# 9/17
time of actual assumption of the promotional rank.
22. Learned CGC submits that prior to assumption of the promotional rank, the
medical condition of the petitioner was again evaluated and he was found unfit
for promotion on account of Primary Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus Type-
II. The petitioner was accordingly declared medically unfit for promotion vide
medical fitness certificate dated 19.10.2023. It is submitted that the petitioner
was not declared unfit on account of his ballistic injury, which was treated as an
operational casualty and for which relaxation of the medical criteria was
available under the applicable policy.
23. Learned CGC submits that after the petitioner was found medically unfit,
his promotion was kept in abeyance till finalisation of the medical proceedings
or till 31.12.2023, whichever was earlier. Since the petitioner did not fulfil the
mandatory medical criteria for promotion, his junior, who fulfilled the prescribed
criteria, was promoted to the next higher rank. It is submitted that the action of
the respondents was thus in accordance with the applicable policy and not
arbitrary.
24. Learned CGC further submits that the petitioner was again considered by
the DPC-2024 for promotion to the rank of Naib Subedar/GD and was found to
fulfil the other mandatory promotional criteria. However, in the meantime, the
petitioner was again placed in Low Medical Category P3 (T-24) for Primary
Hypertension and Pre-diabetes with effect from 13.02.2024 pursuant to the
Medical Board dated 27.03.2024. Therefore, he could not be promoted in the
year 2024 also.
25. Learned CGC submits that the provisions of RoI 04/2002 relied upon by the

Page No.# 10/17
petitioner in respect of personnel wounded or injured during active Government
duty have already been extended to the petitioner in respect of his operational
injury. He submits that the petitioner was promoted to the rank of Warrant
Officer/GD on 01.06.2011 despite being in Low Medical Category P2
(Permanent) on account of the ballistic injury. The present case, however,
relates to his non-promotion on account of Primary Hypertension and Diabetes
Mellitus Type-II, which is not covered by the relaxation available for operational
casualties.
26. Learned CGC submits that the case of Rifleman/Store Keeper Technician
Ramakant Bhakoji, relied upon by the petitioner, stands on a different footing.
In that case, the individual was in SHAPE-I on the date of his seniority and was
medically downgraded only thereafter. Since he fulfilled the medical criteria on
the relevant date, his promotion was granted. In the case of the petitioner,
however, he was found medically unfit for promotion when his health status was
evaluated prior to assumption of the promotional rank. Therefore, the two cases
cannot be treated as similarly situated.
27. Learned CGC submits that the revised guidelines dated 02.08.2024 relating
to certification of medical category cannot be applied retrospectively to the
petitioner’s case. The petitioner’s promotion order was issued on 14.08.2023
and his medical fitness was considered in accordance with the policy applicable
at the relevant time. The subsequent guidelines, therefore, cannot confer any
right upon the petitioner in respect of the earlier promotion process.
28. Learned CGC submits that the fact that the petitioner was upgraded to
SHAPE-I with effect from 29.05.2023 does not by itself entitle him to promotion.
The applicable policy requires the individual to be medically fit on the date of

Page No.# 11/17
assumption of the promotional rank. Since the petitioner was subsequently
found unfit on medical examination, he did not satisfy the mandatory
requirement for assumption of the rank of Naib Subedar/GD.

29. Learned CGC further submits that the petitioner’s case was considered by
the competent authorities at every relevant stage and the decision not to permit
him to assume the promotional rank was taken on the basis of the medical
assessment and the applicable policy. There is, therefore, no violation of the
principles of natural justice, administrative fair play or any constitutional
provision.
30. Learned CGC submits that the petitioner has not been denied promotion on
account of his operational injury. The relaxation applicable to such injury was
duly granted to him. His non-promotion was solely on account of Primary
Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus Type-II, which rendered him medically unfit
for promotion under the applicable policy. The writ petition, therefore, lacks
merit and is liable to be dismissed.
31. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the
parties and also perused the materials available on record.
32. The admitted position is that the petitioner was considered by the
Departmental Promotion Committee for promotion to the rank of Naib
Subedar/GD and his case was recommended subject to upgradation of his
medical category. Thereafter, the petitioner was examined on 29.05.2023 by the
Specialist Medicine Officer, Border Security Force, who, upon considering his
medical condition and the control of his blood pressure and glycemic condition,
recommended that he may be upgraded to SHAPE-I, subject to continuation of

Page No.# 12/17
medication and regular follow-up.
33. Pursuant thereto, a duly constituted Re-categorisation Medical Board was
convened and, vide proceedings dated 26.06.2023, the petitioner was upgraded
to medical category P1/SHAPE-I for Primary Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus
Type-II with effect from 29.05.2023. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner
thereafter underwent his Annual Medical Examination on 22.07.2023 and was
found in medical category SHAPE-I.
34. In view of the aforesaid medical assessment, the respondent authorities
issued the promotion order dated 14.08.2023 promoting the petitioner to the
rank of Naib Subedar/GD, subject to his meeting the prescribed medical criteria
on the date of assumption of the promoted rank. Thus, the petitioner had been
found otherwise eligible for promotion by the DPC and the competent authority
acted upon his upgraded medical category while issuing the promotion order.
35. The petitioner was thereafter examined by the medical authority and was
declared unfit for promotion vide medical fitness certificate dated 19.10.2023 on
account of Primary Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus Type-II. On the basis of
the said certificate, the petitioner was not permitted to assume the promotional
rank and his junior was promoted.
36. This Court is conscious of the fact that medical fitness is a condition
prescribed for promotion under the applicable rules and that the Court, while
exercising judicial review, does not sit in appeal over the opinion of a competent
Medical Board. The question in the present case, however, is whether the
subsequent medical opinion dated 19.10.2023 could have been relied upon
without considering the earlier medical assessments which had found the

Page No.# 13/17
petitioner fit in SHAPE-I.
37. Primary Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus Type-II were already known
medical conditions of the petitioner and had formed the basis of his earlier
placement in low medical category. The said conditions were considered by the
Specialist Medicine Officer on 29.05.2023, followed by the Medical Board
proceedings dated 26.06.2023, and the petitioner was upgraded to SHAPE-I
with effect from 29.05.2023. His medical status was thereafter again assessed
during the Annual Medical Examination on 22.07.2023 and he was found in
SHAPE-I.
38. The subsequent medical fitness certificate dated 19.10.2023 also refers to
the same medical conditions. However, no material has been placed before this
Court to show that, between the Annual Medical Examination dated 22.07.2023
and the subsequent medical assessment, the petitioner suffered any fresh injury
or illness or that any specific deterioration in his medical condition was recorded
which warranted a different medical assessment.
39. This Court is not holding that a subsequent medical examination cannot
result in a different medical assessment. A subsequent opinion may certainly be
acted upon where the medical record warrants such course. However, where
successive assessments by competent medical authorities had placed the
petitioner in SHAPE-I, the subsequent opinion dated 19.10.2023 was required to
be considered along with the earlier medical record.
40. The respondents have not placed any material on record explaining the
departure from the earlier medical assessment. The later certificate records the
petitioner as unfit on account of the ailments which had already been

Page No.# 14/17
considered while upgrading him to SHAPE-I. In such circumstances, the
subsequent certificate could not have been treated as conclusive without
examining the earlier medical assessments and the basis for the change in
medical status.
41. The condition in the promotion order dated 14.08.2023 requiring the
petitioner to meet the medical criteria on the date of assumption of the rank
cannot be disputed. At the same time, the said condition has to be considered
along with the medical record of the petitioner. The requirement of medical
fitness on the date of assumption cannot mean that the earlier medical
assessments become irrelevant or that a subsequent contrary opinion can be
acted upon without considering the medical record as a whole.
42. The respondents have relied upon the requirement that an individual must
satisfy the prescribed medical standard on the date of assumption of the
promotional rank. The said requirement, however, does not dispense with
proper consideration of successive medical assessments made by competent
authorities. In the present case, the promotion order itself was issued after the
petitioner had been upgraded to SHAPE-I and found fit during his Annual
Medical Examination.
43. The operational injury sustained by the petitioner is not the basis for denial
of his promotion. The respondents themselves have admitted that the ballistic
injury sustained by the petitioner during an operation was attributable to
Government service and that the applicable policy permits relaxation of the
SHAPE-I requirement in respect of such operational casualty. The petitioner had
earlier been promoted to the rank of Warrant Officer/GD notwithstanding his P2
(Permanent) medical category on account of the said injury. The respondents

Page No.# 15/17
have also specifically stated that the petitioner was not denied promotion on
account of the operational injury but on account of Primary Hypertension and
Diabetes Mellitus Type-II.

44. In Brigadier Javed Iqbal (Supra), relied upon by the learned counsel for
the petitioner, the Hon’ble Supreme Court considered the medical record of the
officer and the improvement in his medical condition while examining the issue
of promotion. The said decision does not dispense with the requirement of
medical fitness under the applicable rules. It does, however, support the
principle that the medical record and the subsequent medical position of an
individual have to be considered while dealing with the question of promotion.
45. The revised guidelines dated 02.08.2024 issued by the respondent
authorities provide that the medical category ascertained during AME/PME
remains valid for a period of one year and that a fresh medical examination for
ascertaining the medical category would be necessitated upon occurrence of a
fresh injury or illness during the intervening period. The said guidelines were
issued subsequently and cannot be applied retrospectively to confer a right
upon the petitioner. However, they indicate the approach subsequently adopted
by the respondents regarding the validity of an already ascertained medical
category.
46. The case of Rifleman/Store Keeper Technician Ramakant Bhakoji relied
upon by the petitioner stands on its own facts. The respondents have stated
that in that case the individual was in SHAPE-I on the date of his seniority and
was downgraded subsequently. The said case, therefore, cannot by itself
determine the entitlement of the petitioner. The present case has to be decided
on the basis of the petitioner’s own medical record and the successive

Page No.# 16/17
assessments made by the competent medical authorities.
47. It is true that promotion is subject to fulfilment of the conditions prescribed
under the applicable service rules. At the same time, the requirement of medical
fitness has to be considered fairly and on the basis of the medical record
available in the case. In the present case, the respondents, while relying upon
the medical fitness certificate dated 19.10.2023, have not satisfactorily
explained the departure from the earlier medical assessments or shown any
intervening medical development warranting such departure.
48. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the
considered view that the respondents failed to properly consider the earlier
Medical Board proceedings dated 26.06.2023 and the Annual Medical
Examination dated 22.07.2023 while relying upon the subsequent medical
fitness certificate dated 19.10.2023. The decision to withhold the petitioner’s
promotion, therefore, cannot be sustained.
49. Consequently, the impugned promotion order whereby the petitioner’s
name was deleted from the promotion list and the communication dated
31.01.2024 rejecting his claim for promotion are hereby set aside.
50. The respondent authorities are directed to reconsider the case of the
petitioner for promotion to the rank of Naib Subedar/GD, in the light of the
observations made hereinabove and the medical record available as on the
relevant date. Upon such consideration, the petitioner shall be granted
promotion with effect from the date on which his immediate junior was
promoted, with all consequential service benefits, in accordance with law.
51. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of 3 (three)

Page No.# 17/17
months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
52. The writ petition stands allowed and disposed of in terms of the above
directions. There shall be no order as to costs.

JUDGE
Comparing Assistant