Sunil Kumar Meel vs Union Of India & Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 165 Del

*                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                              WP(C) No.16/2012

%                         Date of Decision: 09.01.2012

Sunil Kumar Meel                                               .... Petitioner

                       Through Mr.D.S.Kauntae, Advocate

                                  Versus

Union of India & Ors.                                      .... Respondents

                       Through Mr.Abhimanyu Kumar, Advocate along
                               with Lieutenant Vikram Srivastava

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R.MIDHA


ANIL KUMAR, J.

*

1. The petitioner has sought directions to the respondents, Union of

India and the Director General of Medical Services (Navy), Integrated

Headquarters, Ministry of Defence to conduct the appeal/review

medical board of the petitioner and to furnish the report of his medical

fitness, restricting itself to declare and decide only the medical fitness of

the petitioner with respect to the disability indicated in the letter dated

30th January, 2011.

2. The petitioner contended that he had passed the Senior

Secondary School Examination from the Secondary Education Board,

Rajasthan with first Division on 12th June, 2007. Thereafter the

petitioner had applied for enrollment in the Indian navy. On 30th

September, 2010, the petitioner had received a call up letter-cum-admit

card to appear before the Recruitment Division at INS, Chilka, PO-

Khurda, Orissa for the test which was to take place at Jodhpur

(Rajasthan) on 5th October, 2010. The petitioner was also directed to

report to the Military Hospital (Medical Board Office) on 31st October,

2010.

3. According to the petitioner, the final select list was to be declared

on 30th December, 2010. The petitioner has, however, been declared

medically unfit in terms of communication dated 30th January, 2011

sent by the Recruiting Officer citing the reasons that the petitioner is

suffering from "Urine Sugar". It was also communicated to the

petitioner that even during the enrollment for the medical examination

by the enrollment medical officer as well as the classified specialist, the

petitioner was declared unfit on account of having "Urine Sugar".

4. The petitioner asserted that it was never communicated to him at

the initial stage about his medical unfitness on account of him suffering

from the said disease by any of the recruiting authorities. Dissatisfied

with the result of his medical examination declaring him unfit, the

petitioner sent a representation dated 23rd May, 2011 and sought the

certified copies of the entire medical examination record.

5. The petitioner contended that he had filed another application

dated 6th August, 2011 seeking that an appeal/review medical board be

conducted at the Army Hospital R&R so as to obtain a final fitness

certificate from the competent service hospital/medical institute, but no

response for the same was received.

6. The petitioner has, therefore, filed the present writ petition

contending that he is entitled to be re-examined by an appeal/review

medical board and since there is no bar in law to constitute the

appeal/review medical board, the petitioner is seeking directions to the

respondents to constitute an appeal/review medical board in order to

re-examine him regarding the disability cited by the authorities in the

letter dated 30th January, 2011.

7. The learned counsel for the respondents, Mr. Abhimanyu Kumar,

Advocate, who appears on advance notice has contended that if a

candidate is declared permanently unfit (QAP) then he has to get

himself treated/cured/checked for the disability indicated in the

certificate and thereafter such a candidate can report to the Military

Hospital (Medical Board Office) with a copy of the review certificate and

two copies of the MOR. However, if the candidate remains medically

unfit, no further action is contemplated, since the candidate remains

ineligible for the selection. It is also categorically stipulated in the

instructions to the candidate that the medical opinion other than the

designated service hospital is also not acceptable.

8. This is not disputed that the petitioner was declared medically

unfit for enrollment in the Navy during the enrollment medical

examination on account of having „Urine Sugar‟. Thereafter, the

petitioner has not obtained any medical opinion stating the contrary nor

has he got himself treated to indicate that the petitioner is medically fit,

from any of the designated service hospitals. In the absence of any other

opinion from a designated service hospital regarding the medical fitness

of the petitioner, the petitioner is not entitled to claim that there should

be an appeal/review medical board examination of the petitioner at the

Army Hospital R&R.

9. This cannot be disputed that the medical board consists of

experts and that their opinion is to be given due weightage and value

and that such opinion of the medical board is to be given primacy

unless a different opinion is available on record. Even when a different

medical opinion is available, the Court should be slow in interfering

with the same and substituting its own opinion with the opinion of the

medical board. However, in certain circumstances, the respondents can

be directed to constitute an appeal/review medical board and to re-

examine a candidate.

10. This is not disputed that no contrary opinion has been obtained

by the petitioner from any of the designated hospitals, nor has he got

himself treated/cured for the disability cited by the authorities. The

learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to show any regulation or

any instruction to the candidate, indicating that even without getting

treated/cured or obtaining the medical report showing fitness of the

candidate from a designated service hospital, such a candidate is

entitled for an appeal/review medical board in a routine manner.

11. In the totality of the facts and circumstances as disclosed in the

writ petition, the petitioner has not been able to make out a case for

constituting an appeal/review medical board. In the circumstances, the

petitioner is not entitled for the relief claimed by him and the writ

petition is therefore, dismissed.

ANIL KUMAR, J.

J.R.MIDHA, J.

January 09, 2012 vk