Subsequent Medical Standards Cannot Be Retrospectively Applied To Disqualify Candidates Under Prevailing Recruitment Rules

The applicant applied for the post of Fire Operator in the Delhi Fire Service (DFS) under a recruitment process initiated around 2014.

After qualifying the written examination and physical endurance/driving tests, he was eventually issued an offer of appointment on June 25, 2020.

However, during the medical examination, he was declared "unfit" because he had undergone LASIK surgery.

The respondents relied on a departmental communication dated September 11, 2020, which introduced a condition that LASIK surgery renders a candidate unfit, despite the applicant’s post-surgery vision being a perfect 6/6.

A subsequent Medical Board at Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital on December 28, 2021, confirmed the applicant had 6/6 vision and noted that the LASIK disqualification was not part of the official Gazette Notification/Recruitment Rules of 1999.

1. Whether the respondents could legally disqualify a candidate based on a medical standard (LASIK surgery) that was not part of the Recruitment Rules at the time the recruitment process commenced.

2. Whether subsequent amendments or clarifications to medical standards can be applied retrospectively to deny appointment to an otherwise qualified candidate.

The Tribunal primarily applied the principle that recruitment rules and medical standards cannot be altered retrospectively to the detriment of a candidate once the selection process has begun.

It relied on the precedent set by the Delhi High Court in Govt. of NCT of Delhi Ors. v. Sunil Kumar (W.P.(C) No. 11426/2023), which held that if LASIK surgery results in the required visual acuity (6/6), the candidate should be evaluated for actual fitness rather than being summarily disqualified.

It also referenced the Supreme Court’s observations in Dalbir Etc. v. Union of India Ors., emphasizing that modern medical standards in disciplined forces should accommodate corrective surgeries like LASIK if the candidate meets the functional visual requirements.

The Tribunal reasoned that at the time the recruitment process began and until 2018, the applicable Recruitment Rules for the Delhi Fire Service only required a visual acuity of 6/6 and contained no prohibition against LASIK surgery.

The respondents’ attempt to disqualify the applicant was based on a 2020 internal memorandum—issued years after the applicant had qualified the exam stages—which sought to add a disqualification criteria not found in the original 1999 Gazette Notification.

The Tribunal found that the applicant’s post-corrective vision was consistently recorded as 6/6, satisfying the only standard present in the statutory rules.

Following the reasoning in Sunil Kumar, the Tribunal held that an employer might prescribe high standards, but they must be part of the notified rules or applied prospectively; they cannot be used to "move the goalposts" mid-selection.

It directed the respondents to refer the applicant to a fresh Medical Board at Dr. R.P. Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, AIIMS, New Delhi, within two months.

The Tribunal held that if the Board finds the applicant’s vision is 6/6 and he is otherwise fit, he cannot be denied appointment solely due to LASIK surgery.

Upon being found fit, the respondents must issue an offer of appointment within two months, granting consequential benefits on a notional basis.