Delhi High Court
Jitender Singh vs Union Of India And Others on 31 July, 2023
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 31.07.2023
+ W.P.(C) 9759/2023 & CM APPL. 37434/2023
JITENDER SINGH ..... Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Appellant: Mr. Brijesh Yadav, Ms. Nikita and Mr. Sandeep
Yadav, Advocates.
For the Respondents: Mr. Pradeep Kumar Jha, Senior Panel Counsel with
Ms. Prerna Dhall and Mr. Karan Wadhwa,
Advocates with Mr. Hemendra Singh, DC (Law),
BSF.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. Petitioner seeks quashing of the Detailed Medical Examination
result dated 02.06.2023 and the Review Medical Examination result
dated 05.06.2023.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has
been rejected on the ground of 'tachycardia' and Incomplete Right
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:02.08.2023
14:29:20
Bundle Branch Block (RBBB). It has also been contended that
"Revised Uniform Guidelines for review in medical examination in
Central Armed Police Forces and Assam Rifles for GOs and NGOs"
dated 31.05.2021 have not been followed in this regard.
3. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing
for the respondent.
4. With the consent of the parties, the petition is taken up for final
disposal.
5. Reference may be had to the abovesaid guidelines prescribed
for the Review Medical Board which, inter-alia, reads as under:
"7(e) For candidates who have been rejected on the
ground of hypertension/tachycardia should have been
admitted/hospitalized by the Board before giving their
final opinion regarding the candidate's fitness or
otherwise. The hospitalization report should indicate
whether the rise in blood pressure is of transient in nature
due to excitement etc. or whether it is due to any organic
disease. In all such cases X-Ray and electro-
cardiographic examinations of heart and blood
examinations like cholesterol/lipid profile, S. Creatinine
etc. tests should also be carried out."
6. It is not in dispute that petitioner has been declared 'unfit' on
the ground of 'tachycardia'. Additionally, he has been declared unfit
on the ground of Incomplete Right Bundle Branch Block (RBBB). It is
also not in dispute that petitioner was not hospitalized by the Review
Medical Board prior to giving final opinion. The Medical Board, as
per the guidelines, should have ascertained the exact cause of
increased blood pressure by carrying out x-ray, ECG and other tests,
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:02.08.2023
14:29:20
as required by the guidelines and should indicate whether it is
transient in nature or whether it is due to any organic disease.
7. Since the guidelines have clearly not been followed, the opinion
rendered by the Review Medical Board cannot be accepted.
Accordingly, the findings of the Review Medical Board are set aside.
The respondents are directed to constitute a fresh Review Medical
Board which shall examine the petitioner, inter-alia, in accordance
with the guidelines dated 31.05.2021. Since the petitioner is being sent
for re-examination because of the non-compliance of guidelines for
review medical board, we deem it expedient to direct that the
petitioner be also examined for the alleged ailment of Incomplete
RBBB.
8. The Review Medical Board be constituted within a period of
two weeks from today with at least four days' advance notice to the
petitioner.
9. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. It would be open
to the petitioner to avail of further remedies, if aggrieved by any
further decision of the Review Medical Board.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
MANOJ JAIN, J
JULY 31, 2023
NA
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:02.08.2023
14:29:20
