Delhi High Court
Vikash vs Union Of India And Anr. on 29 April, 2022
$~1 (Spl. Bench)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 29.04.2022
REV.PET. 122/2022 in
+ W.P.(C) 2333/2020
VIKASH ...... Petitioner
Through: Mr.M.D. Jangra, Adv.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ...... Respondents
Through: Mrs.Abha Malhotra with Mr.J. Karaa
Malhotra, Advs. For Respondent
Nos.1 & 2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON
J U D G M E N T (oral)
CM APPL. 20796/2022 (exemption)
1. The application is allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2. The application is accordingly disposed of.
CM APPL. 20795/2022 (condonation of delay)
3. By way of the present application, petitioner is seeking condonation
of delay of 88 days in filing the review petition in W.P.(C) No.2333/2020.
4. In view of the reasons stated in the application and various orders
passed by this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we hereby condone
the delay of 88 days in filing the review petition.
5. Application is allowed and disposed of.
REV. PET. 122/2022
6. Present review petition has been filed under Order XLVII Rules 1 & 2
CPC seeking review of order dated 10.11.2020 passed in W.P.(C)
2333/2020 as the said petition was dismissed on delay and latches but not
on merit.
7. The case of the review petitioner is that he was found medically unfit
by the Medical Board of the respondents initially on account of "GROSS
DNS" i.e. deviated nasal septum. Thereafter petitioner sought second
opinion from a Government Hospital namely Chaudhary Bansilal Hospital,
Bhiwani (Haryana) and was declared fit. On submission of the aforesaid
reports to the respondents, petitioner was again called for review medical
examination on 31.03.2018 where he was again declared unfit on account of
"Gran-DNB" and Mucous Retention Cyst.
8. Learned counsel for the review petitioner further submitted that it is
quite strange that he was found unfit for different reason in the review
medical examination, therefore, this Court omitted to notice that petitioner
was declared unfit for one reason for first time and another reason for the
second time, which is contrary stand of the medical board, therefore, finding
of the review board is erroneous and liable to be quashed and set aside by
this Court.
9. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the
material placed on record.
10. On perusal of the order dated 10.11.2020 passed in W.P.(C)
No.2333/2020, this Court did not find any merit therein as observed in para
4 of said order which reads as under:
"4. On a reading of the petition we did not find any merit
therein and have thus heard the counsel for the petitioner
at length, on admission."
11. However, case of the petitioner was noted in para 5 of the order as
under:
"5. It is the pleaded case of the petitioner, (i) that he was
a candidate for recruitment to the Group-C Non Gazetted
(Combatised) posts in the respondents SSB, pursuant to
the advertisement issued in the year 2016; (ii) that he is a
domicile of Haryana and belongs to OBC category; (iii)
that the recruitment comprised of Physical Efficiency Test
(PET), Physical Standard Test (PST), Verification of
Documents, Written Examination / Assessment and
detailed Medical Examination; (iv) the petitioner cleared
all the successive stages and undertook the Medical
Examination at SSB Gorakhpur Uttar Pradesh on 5th
December, 2017; (v) in the said Medical Examination,
the petitioner was declared unfit on the ground of
"GROSS DNS" i.e. deviated nasal septum; (vi) the
petitioner got himself medically examined at a
Government hospital namely Chaudhary Bansilal
Hospital, Bhiwani, Haryana, on 7th December, 2017,
where the Medical Officer, ENT found the petitioner fit
and opined error in the judgment of the Medical Test
conducted by SSB on account of DNS to Rfide; (vii) the
petitioner, in order to get a second opinion, got himself
admitted on 18th December, 2017 at Pandit B.D. Sharma
Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak,
Haryana and on 19th December, 2017 was successfully
operated upon for Septoplasty LA and was discharged on
21st December, 2017; (viii) the petitioner thereafter
appealed against the decision of the Medical Board of the
respondents SSB and was called for Review Medical
Examination on 31st March, 2018, where he was again
declared unfit on account of "Gran-DNB" and the
Review Medical Board further found the petitioner to be
having a Mucous Retention Cyst;"
12. It is not in dispute that petitioner was found medically unfit by the
Medical Board initially on account of "GROSS DNS" and by subsequent
Board, he was declared unfit on account of "Gran-DNB" and the Review
Medical Board further found him to be having a Mucous Retention Cyst
which was developed due to the surgery underwent by the petitioner as
noted above.
13. It is pertinent to mention that since the two Medical Boards have
already been conducted by the respondents, the present petition is amount to
reargue the case. Therefore, we find no ground to interfere in the order
dated 10.11.2020 passed in W.P.(C) 2333/2020.
14. Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)
JUDGE
(ASHA MENON)
JUDGE
APRIL 29, 2022/ab
