Delhi High Court
Satish vs Union Of India & Ors. on 13 May, 2016
Author: Hima Kohli
$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 2898/2016
SATISH ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr. Ajit Kakkar, Advocate
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through : Ms. Amrita Prakash, Advocate
Advocate with Surgeon Commander
Anand Neelakantan and
Lt. Vikrant Singh.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
% 13.05.2016
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia
for quashing the order dated 19.2.2016 passed by the respondent/Indian
Navy declaring him unfit for appointment to the post of Sailor on the ground
that he is suffering from "hyperhidrosis".
2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that after the petitioner's
candidature was turned down by the respondents, he had approached a
Senior Specialist, Department of Skin & STD, Safdarjung Hospital, Delhi,
who has given a diagnosis on 4.3.2016 to the effect that the petitioner had
been examined for "hyperhidrosis", but at the time of his examination, there
was no evidence of the said condition.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents states, on instructions, that the
condition of "hyperhidrosis" in layman's language means a condition where
the palms and soles of the feet suffer from excessive sweating on account of
a sympathetic nervous condition. She submits that the nature of the job of a
Sailor, as entailed in the Indian Navy, would require him to be mainly
posted at coastal areas where the weather is ordinarily hot, humid and
balmy, which would impede the petitioner from discharging his day to day
duties.
4. Having regard to the exigencies of service prescribed for a Sailor in
the Indian Navy and the submission of the counsel for the respondents that
this is not an ailment of a nature which could be overlooked to recruit the
petitioner, we are of the opinion that the petitioner's physical condition, as
detailed in the records handed over by the counsel for the respondents for
our perusal and also confirmed during the petitioner's provisional diagnosis
by the Surgeon Commander, Surgical Specialist, does not entitle him to any
relief. The parameters of fitness and the required standards for appointment
of a candidate in the Forces, has to be left to the discretion of the
respondents.
5. In any event, the report relied on by learned counsel for the petitioner
specifically states that at the time of his examination, the petitioner was not
suffering from sweating in the palms, which report is of the month of March,
2016 when the weather condition in Delhi are more conducive vis-a-vis the
places where the petitioner would be required to be posted for discharging
his duties, that are mostly situated in coastal areas.
6. Taking into consideration the nature of the petitioner's diagnosis
which reveals that he suffers from excessive sweating in his palms and soles,
we are of the opinion that he is not entitled to any relief. Accordingly, the
writ petition is dismissed.
HIMA KOHLI, J
SUNIL GAUR, J
MAY 13, 2016
sk
