Delhi High Court
Sharon Francis vs Central Reserve Police Force And ... on 17 December, 2021
$~78
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 17th December, 2021
+ W.P.(C) 13139/2021 & CM APPL. 41434/2021
SHARON FRANCIS ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Amit Kaushik & Ms.Bhateri
Devi, Advs.
versus
CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE AND ORS
..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Rajesh Gogna, CGSC with
Mr.Arihant Jain, Adv. for UOI
with Dr.Amarnath Kumar,
CRPF, DC/SMO &
Dr.Naishadh J. Jivrajani, BSF,
DC.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioner had applied for the 'Delhi Police, CAPFs and
Assistant Sub-Inspector in CISF Examination, 2019'.
2. The petitioner was declared unfit for appointment during the
Detailed Medical Examination on the following grounds:-
i.) Overweight
ii) Flat foot present
iii) Distant vision (Rt) eye
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:18.12.2021
14:35:34
iv). Anaemia
3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was thereafter
referred to the Jawahar Lal Nehru Hospital, Ajmer (hereinafter
referred to as 'JLN Hospital') for further examination. The petitioner
contends that during such examination, the petitioner was found to be
medically fit. The petitioner contends that inspite of the said report
finding the petitioner to be medically fit, the petitioner was again
declared unfit on the grounds of 'Defective distance vision (Rt)',
'Overweight by 2 kg' and 'Flat Foot' by the Review Medical
Examination Board.
4. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 03.12.2021, the
respondents have produced before us the original medical record of
the petitioner. The doctors who constituted the Review Medical Board
are also present in the Court today.
5. Perusal of the medical record of the petitioner shows that there
is a certificate dated 28.10.2021 which records the vision of the
petitioner to be 6/6 in both eyes.
6. The doctors present in Court explain that the petitioner was
never referred to the JLN Hospital for an opinion on his vision and
therefore, the abovementioned certificate is not binding on the
respondent. They further submit that the said certificate is in fact not
even signed or stamped and therefore, is doubtful.
7. Be that as it may, as the said certificate forms part of the
original medical record of the petitioner and as it is not denied that
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:18.12.2021
14:35:34
otherwise the petitioner was referred to the JLN Hospital. We also
note that in the Detailed Medical Examination, the petitioner's eye
vision was recorded as 6/9 (Rt) and 6/6 (Lt), while in the Review
Medical Examination the petitioner's vision was recorded as 6/12 (Rt)
and 6/6 (Lt). Keeping in view the varying reports of the Detailed
Medical Examination and the Review Medical Examination as also
the certificate of the JLN Hospital, we find this to be a fit case for
issuing a direction for re-examination of the petitioner.
8. As far as the declaration of petitioner as unfit on account of
being overweight by 2 kg is concerned, the learned counsel for the
petitioner draws our attention to Clause 2(d) of the 'Review Medical
Examination in Central Armed Police Forces and Assam Rifles for
GOs & NGOs: Amendment Thereof' dated 31.05.2021. The same
prescribe the Body Mass Index (hereinafter referred to as 'BMI') of a
candidate has to be considered to arrive at conclusion about the
candidate being overweight and a variation of 5 kg more or less from
the minimum or maximum limit may be accepted. The petitioner was
found to be overweight by only 2 kgs by the Review Medical Board
and it is not stated if his BMI was checked.
9. As far as finding of the petitioner being suffering from 'Flat
Foot' is concerned, we find that the petitioner was referred to the JLN
Hospital for obtaining an opinion of him being suffering from flat foot
with an X-Ray. The opinion of the orthopaedic from JLN Hospital is
not on record in the original medical file. In fact, the petitioner
contends that without waiting for such opinion, the Review Medical
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:18.12.2021
14:35:34
Examination Board declared the petitioner unfit on account of flat foot
again.
10. In any view, as we are referring the petitioner to the Army R&R
Hospital, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'R&R Hospital') for an
opinion on his eye vision, we are of the opinion that the petitioner can
also be examined by an Orthopedic at the R&R Hospital on his alleged
unfitness on account of being flat footed. For this purpose, the
respondent shall request the R&R Hospital to constitute a Board of
doctors consisting of a specialist Ophthalmologist and a specialist
Orthopedic and give an appointment to the petitioner for being
examined within a period of ten days from today. The report of the
R&R Hospital shall be considered as final, with no party being
allowed to challenge the same. The respondent shall act upon the
appointment application of the petitioner in accordance with the report
that is received from the R&R Hospital within a period of two weeks
from the receipt of the report. The report received from the R&R
Hospital shall also be shared with the petitioner.
11. The petition is disposed of with the above directions.
12. The original medical record of the petitioner is returned back to
the respondents.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
MANMOHAN, J
DECEMBER 17, 2021/rv
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:18.12.2021
14:35:34
