Authorities must permit a scheduled review medical examination before excluding a recruitment candidate declared medically unfit.

The applicant, Pooja, participated in the recruitment process for the post of Constable (Executive) (Male and Female) in the Delhi Police Examination, 2023.

During her Detailed Medical Examination (DME) conducted on 23 January 2024, she was declared medically unfit on account of “Point” in her eyes.

She was thereafter directed to report for a Review Medical Examination (RME) at the ITBP Base Hospital, Tigri, on 25 January 2024.

However, the respondents declared the final result on 24 January 2024, before the scheduled RME, and did not include her name in the final list, thereby preventing her from undergoing the RME.

Subsequently, her roll number was included in the Reserve Panel List dated 6 February 2026 under the UR category, although she had applied under the OBC category.

Despite this, her name was omitted from the notice dated 28 March 2026 requiring reserve-panel candidates to report for document verification and issuance of appointment offers.

She therefore challenged the non-inclusion, the DME report, and sought an independent medical re-examination and consequential appointment-related relief.

Whether the applicant was denied a fair and reasonable opportunity to undergo the RME when the final result was declared before the date fixed for her RME.

Whether, in view of her subsequent inclusion in the Reserve Panel List, the respondents were required to conduct the applicant’s RME and consider consequential benefits if she was found medically fit.

The application was filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

The Tribunal applied the principle of procedural fairness, holding that a candidate who has been directed to appear for an RME must be afforded a genuine and reasonable opportunity to do so before her candidature is finally rejected on medical grounds.

The Tribunal also applied the principle that consequential appointment-related relief may follow only if the candidate is found medically fit and satisfies all other eligibility and recruitment requirements.

The order was expressly confined to the peculiar facts of the case and was not to be treated as a precedent.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had been declared medically unfit at the DME but had thereafter been specifically directed to report for an RME on 25 January 2024.

Since the final result was declared on 24 January 2024, the applicant’s name was excluded before she could exercise the opportunity already granted to her.

The respondents’ explanation that the final merit list was prepared on the basis of her medical unfitness did not address the procedural unfairness caused by prematurely finalising her candidature.

Her later inclusion in the Reserve Panel List on her own merit further supported the conclusion that she deserved consideration through the RME process.

In these peculiar circumstances, the Tribunal considered it necessary to restore the opportunity of RME, while leaving appointment and other consequential benefits dependent upon the medical result and fulfilment of the applicable recruitment conditions.

If she was declared medically fit, consequential benefits, including consideration for appointment, were to follow in accordance with law, subject to her satisfying all other eligibility conditions and applicable recruitment requirements.

The directions were limited to the peculiar facts of the case, all pending miscellaneous applications were disposed of, and there was no order as to costs.