Delhi High Court
Sonu vs Union Of India & Ors. on 17 May, 2016
$~5.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 3202/2016
SONU ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Yadav, Advocate
with petitioner in person.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Dev P. Bhardwaj, CGSC with
Mr. P.C. Yadav, Senior Panel Counsel.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
ORDER
% 17.05.2016
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia
that the proceedings of the Review Medical Examination held on 11.01.2016
at the BSF Base Hospital be quashed and the respondent No.3/BSF be
directed to recruit him as a Constable (GD).
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was one
of the candidates selected by the respondent No.2/SSC for the recruitment in
the Paramilitary Forces, for posts advertised in the year 2011. The petitioner
was issued an appointment letter by the respondent No.3/BSF on 17.09.2015
and he had joined his duties at the Chhawla Camp, New Delhi on
30.09.2015, as a probationer. However, the petitioner was declared unfit in
the Review Medical Examination conducted by the respondent No.3/BSF on
28.10.2015, on the ground that he is suffering from "testicular swelling
(Lt.)".
3. Aggrieved by the said report, the petitioner had approached the
Government Hospital at Raebareli, UP for a report, wherein the CMO had
recorded that the petitioner was operated on 3.11.2015 at the District
Hospital, Raebareli and he was not suffering from any Testicular Swelling
(Lt.) and was medically fit for the said post. Armed with the aforesaid
document, the petitioner approached the respondent No.3/BSF for seeking a
Review Medical Board, which was conducted on 11.1.2016, wherein he was
again declared unfit for the reason that he had been operated for "hydrocele
swelling and scrotum was still present".
4. Though the petitioner has not filed the report of the Review Medical
Board held on 11.1.2016, counsel for the respondents has handed over the
documents pertaining to the petitioner, and states that ordinarily, the
respondents ought to have waited for a period of six months from the date of
the petitioner's surgery, for re-examining him. He states that at the end of
the period of six months, reckoned from the date of his surgery, the
respondents may be permitted to approach the Army R&R Hospital with a
request for fixing a date and time for re-examining the petitioner.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission, the present petition is disposed of
with directions issued to the respondent No.3/BSF to approach the Army
R&R Hospital, Delhi within two weeks for petitioner's re-examination. The
respondents shall give a written intimation of the date and time fixed, for the
petitioner to present himself at the said Hospital along with all the relevant
documents. A report shall be submitted by the Army R&R Hospital, Delhi
directly to the respondent No.3/BSF within three weeks from the date of the
petitioner presents himself. The respondent No.3/BSF shall give a written
intimation to the petitioner of the decision taken in respect of his medical
condition. If the petitioner is found medically fit by the Army R&R
Hospital for the condition referred to above, then the respondents shall
reinstate him in service from the date of his initial appointment with all the
consequential benefits.
6. It is made clear that the report of the Army R&R Hospital shall be
final and binding on both the parties.
7. The writ petition is disposed of.
HIMA KOHLI, J
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J
MAY 17, 2016
sk/mk
