Delhi High Court
Prabhat Singh vs Union Of India & Ors. on 30 May, 2022
$~23
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 30.05.2022
+ W.P.(C) 8627/2022
PRABHAT SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rohit Bhagat, Advocate
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .... Respondents
Through: Mr. Syed Abdul Haseeb, Sr. Panel
Counsel with Ms. Samiksha, GP for
UOI
Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, SC-GNCTD
(Services) with Mr. Karan Bhardwaj,
ASC, Mr. Uday Singh Ahlawat,
Mrs. Tania Ahlawat, Mrs. Palak
Rohmetra and Mr. Siddhant Tyagi,
Advocates for R-5
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
J U D G M E N T (oral)
CM APPL. 25937/2022 (exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application is accordingly disposed of.
W.P.(C) 8627/2022 & CM APPL.25936/2022 (stay)
3. Vide the present petition, petitioner seeks quashing and setting aside
of the impugned medical reports dated 27.04.2022 and 02.05.2022;
directions to respondents to further consider the petitioner for
selection/recruitment process, in accordance with his merits and to accord all
consequential benefits to him.
4. By way of present writ petition, petitioner is challenging his exclusion
from the selection process for the post of Sub-Inspector in Delhi Police and
CAPFs, through "Sub-Inspector in Delhi Police and CAPFs Examination-
2020" due to aforesaid impugned medical reports. Petitioner qualified his
Physical Endurance Test. However, he was declared unfit vide medical
report dated 27.04.2022 due to the reasons "Non Homogeneous opacity
ruled in right upper zone? Old tuberculosis etiology."
5. Upon petitioner‟s representation for review medical board, he was
called for the same and was directed to get an investigation "HRCT-Chest"
done from Focus Imaging & Research Centre Private Ltd. Petitioner got his
lab test conducted and the report was seen by the Review Medical Board
which also declared the petitioner „unfit‟ vide RMB report dated 02.05.2022
on the following ground:
"Underwent related investigations - suggestive of early
small airways obstruction pleuroparenchymal thickening
plural tags B/C upper lobes architectural distortion and
mild tubular bronchiectasis".
6. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that thereafter, two civil
hospitals, i.e. (1) AIIMS, Delhi vide its report dated 06.05.2022 and (2)
RML Hospital, New Delhi vide its report dated 09.05.2022, have opined
about the fitness of petitioner that he may be considered fit with no active
disease and mild post infective sequelae.
7. Similar issue came before this Court in case of Kartikeya Arora vs.
Union of India & Ors. in W.P.(C) 3485/2020 and the same was decided by
a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 02.09.2020.
8. Since the issue raised in the present petition is undisputedly same,
therefore, we hereby dispose of the present writ petition by directing the
respondents to facilitate the constitution of a Medical Board including
pulmonary experts at the Army Hospital (R&R), New Delhi and also to
facilitate the examination of the petitioner within two weeks from today and
if the petitioner is found fit, he may be permitted to participate in the further
selection process.
9. It is made clear that if the petitioner is found unfit by the aforesaid
medical board, the decision of the medical board shall be final and no
further opportunity shall be granted to him.
10. Copy of this order be transmitted to Incharge, R&R Hospital, New
Delhi for information and necessary compliance.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)
JUDGE
(SAURABH BANERJEE)
JUDGE
MAY 30, 2022/rk
