Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Bharat Kumar vs Union Of India & Others
2012 Latest Caselaw 5478 Del

Citation : 2012 Latest Caselaw 5478 Del
Judgement Date : 12 September, 2012

Delhi High Court
Bharat Kumar vs Union Of India & Others on 12 September, 2012
Author: Pradeep Nandrajog
$~
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                     Date of Decision:12th September, 2012

+                             W.P.(C) 4566/2012

      BHARAT KUMAR                                       ..... Petitioner
                 Represented by:              Mr.S.S.Pandey, Adv.

                     versus

      UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS                      ..... Respondents
                    Represented by: Mr.Ankur Chhibber, Adv. with
                    Wg.Cdr.R.Mohanty, Joint Director, Medical
                    Services, Air Headquarters, R.K.Puram, New
                    Delhi.
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. (Oral)

1. At a medical examination the petitioner was declared unfit by the doctors at the Air Force Central Medical Establishment; being opined to be a patient of 'Hypertension'. The post for which the petitioner was seeking appointment was that of a Fighter Pilot in the Indian Air Force.

2. And suffice would it be to state that 100% fitness would be the sine qua non to be appointed as a Fighter Pilot in the Indian Air Force.

3. The petitioner knew that he had been subjected to an 'Bravo Ambulatory Blood Pressure Test' at which he was declared a patient of hypertension and thus he claims having got himself medically re-examined for hypertension at Medanta Hospital where he was subjected to the Ambulatory Blood Pressure test and was opined to be normal. As per the petitioner he got himself medically examined at Safdarjung Hospital where

he was opined to be normal.

4. Now, recognizing that hypertension is detected by recording the Blood Pressure and candidates could be prone to develop what is called 'White Coat Hypertension', due to stress of medical examination or anxiety i.e. there being a transient rise of Blood Pressure, the experts in the field have opined that when at a routine examination, high Blood Pressure is detected, to rule out the same being a transient rise, the person should be subjected to an 'Ambulatory Blood Pressure' test, which means that monitors are put for a 24 hour duration and a person is permitted to do the normal activities i.e. chat with friends, eat, drink and sleep. If the Blood Pressure constantly shows an abnormality, it is attributable to a chronic hypertension and not a transient hypertension, and as lay persons we would simply understand this to mean that when a person is in a relaxed condition or when the person is sleeping, the work or anxiety related stresses would disappear and so would the high Blood Pressure. But if the high Blood Pressure continues to be shown when a person is relaxed or is sleeping i.e. in a sub-conscious state of mind, it has to be treated as a case of chronic hypertension.

5. If experts in the field so agree, we are nobody to substitute the opinion. And as regards the plea of the petitioner that no such medical disability was detected at Medanta Hospital and Safdarjung Hospital, the answer would be, as told to us by Wing Commander Dr.R.Mohanty, Jt.Director, Medical Services, Air Head Quarters, R.K.Puram, that it is easy to overcome chronic hypertension being detected by taking medicine to control the blood pressure, for then, due to medicine the blood pressure is controlled and notwithstanding chronic hypertension existing, the same cannot be detected i.e. the medical infirmity can be masked.

6. Since we are dealing with an appointment to a post which requires 100% physical fitness and if there is a doubt, to err in favour of the Indian Air Force Authorities because it would be a high risk situation to permit a chronic hypertension patient to fly combat aircrafts; not only endangering the life of the pilot but even others.

7. Declining the request that the petitioner be re-examined for the reason it would be easy for the petitioner to mask the problem and simultaneously highlighting that for the report against the petitioner there is data with the respondent in the form of petitioner's blood pressure being monitored for a continuous period of 24 hours, we dismiss the writ petition but without there being any order as to costs.

(PRADEEP NANDRAJOG) JUDGE

(MANMOHAN SINGH) JUDGE SEPTEMBER 12, 2012 dk

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter