HC asks UPSC to constitute Medical Board including pulmonary experts at the Army Hospital, New Delhi [Read Judgment]

The Delhi  HC in, KARTIKEYA ARORA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. directed the UPSC to facilitate the constitution of a medical board including pulmonary experts at Army Hospital. It was also observed in the present case that a civilian doctor’s opinion cannot suffice to assess the fitness of a recruit, as the standards of physical fitness and health are higher for members of the CAPFs.

Facts

The Petitioner qualified for the CAPF post by giving the UPSC exam and was eligible for Physical and Medical Test. The result of the medical test called him unfit for the post citing Right-Sided Pleural Effusion. He sought a review medical board (RMB) whereby he underwent a medical exam at Safdarjung Hospital where he was called ‘fit’. The petitioner thus appeared before RMB which again declared him unfit. The point of contention of the petitioner was that no pulmonary expert had been included in the RMB despite the fact that the first Medical Board had disqualified the petitioner on the ground of “Pleural Effusion”.

Petitioner’s Contention

It was contended that as a child the petitioner suffered an injury that had healed and never in his life did he suffer from TB. References were made to the guidelines governing medical exams stated even if a person had “pleurisy with effusion”, it had to be recent, within the last two years and if tuberculosis had been treated and there was normal pulmonary function, the person was to be accepted as fit. It was said that it was incumbent upon the respondents to have included a subject specialist doctor to confirm whether or not the petitioner was suffering from any lung disease due to inconsistency in reports.

Respondent’s Contention

It was argued that the respondents could not accept and go by the certification by a doctor of a civil hospital as the requirements of the Forces could be assessed only by the doctors familiar with the demands of service exigencies and its contingencies.

The Court directed the respondents to place on record the details of the qualifications of the doctors, who comprised the RMB

Court’s Finding

The glaring inefficiencies in the reports led the court to state that, “Faced with this kind of completely contradictory conclusions of almost contemporaneous examination of the petitioner, when the respondents deemed it appropriate to allow the request of the petitioner for an RMB, it would be reasonable to assume that the respondents would have included a subject specialist in it. But apparently they did not.”

Looking at a catena of judgments a need was established to revise and redraft the medical examination guidelines in a more exhaustive and illustrative manner. The emphasis was thus made on revised guidelines.

The Court concluded that There was a clear need in the present case for thorough investigations and the inclusion of a pulmonary/chest specialist. The court further directed to constitute Medical Board including pulmonary experts at the Army Hospital (R&R), New Delhi

Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com