Page No.# 1/5 vs The Union Of India And Ors
2026 Latest Caselaw 137 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/5 vs The Union Of India And Ors on 8 January, 2026

Author: Devashis Baruah

Bench: Devashis Baruah

                                                               Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010272822025




                                                         2026:GAU-AS:306

                      THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                        Case No. : WP(C)/7012/2025

         ABUL KALAM AZAD
         S/O MOTIAR RAHMAN.
         RESIDENT OF VILLAGE TOPPARA JHAWPARA PART I, PO RANGAMATI,
         DIST DHUBRI, ASSAM



         VERSUS

         THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
         REP. BY THE SECRETARY , MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL PUBLIC
         GRIEVANCES AND PENSION, DEPT. OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING,
         GOVT. OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI110001

         2:THE STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION

          REP BY THE SECRETARY BLOCK NO. 12
          CGO COMPLEX
          LODHI ROAD
          NEW DELHI 110003

         3:THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR (NER)
          STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION
         HOUSEFED COMPLEX
         ASSAM
          DISPUR GUWAHATI 06

         4:THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL
          CRPF(RECRUITMENT BRANCH) EAST BLOCK 07
         LEVEL 4
          SECTOR 1
          R.K PURAM
          NEW DELHI 110066
                                                            Page No.# 2/5

        5:THE PRESIDING OFFICER

        CT/GD RECRUITMENT EXAM
        2025 RECRUITMENT BOARD
        CRPF GUWAHATI AMERIGOG
        GUWAHATI
        ASSAM 781023

        6:THE PRESIDING OFFICER

         REVIEW MEDICAL EXAMINATION BOARD 2
         CT/GD EXAM 2025 CENTRE CAPFs CH BSF
         PATGAON
         GUWAHATI ASSAM 78102

                                  BEFORE
         HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

For the petitioner (s)        : Mr. A. M. Khan, Advocate

For the respondent (s)         : Ms. B. Sarma, CGC

Date on which judgment is reserved      : NA

Date of pronouncement of judgment          : 08.01.2026

Whether the pronouncement is of the
Operative part of the judgment?            : NA

Whether the full judgment has been
Pronounced?                                 : Yes

                         JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

Heard Mr. A. M. Khan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Ms. B. Sarma, the learned CGC, who appears on behalf of the respondents.

Page No.# 3/5

2. The present writ proceedings is filed challenging the opinion rendered by the Review Medical Examination Board-1 of the Centre-CAPFs, CH BSF, Patgaon wherein it was opined that the petitioner is unfit.

3. The materials on record show that in pursuance to a notice issued for recruitment of Constable (GD) in the Central Arms Police Forces (CAPFs) and SSF, Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles, and Sepoy in Narcotics Control Bureau Examination-2025, the petitioner participated in the said recruitment process. While carrying out the medical examination, it was found that the petitioner was not fit for appointment as a Constable (GD). The petitioner thereupon requested for a review. The Review Medical Board by the opinion rendered on 22.11.2025 also concluded that the petitioner was unfit on the ground of Stammering.

4. It is the further case of the petitioner that the petitioner thereupon carried out certain examinations at the Gauhati Medical College & Hospital (GMCH) and it is the case of the petitioner that in the examination report of the GMCH dated 25.11.2025, no such opinion was given to the effect that the stammering of the petitioner may cause risk in the enrolment of the petitioner in the armed force. It is under such circumstances that the petitioner has approached this Court.

Page No.# 4/5

5. This Court has duly heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and has also perused the materials on record.

6. This Court has also taken note of the fact that the petitioner, upon obtaining the medical opinion from the GMCH had not approached the respondent authorities by submitting a representation and had directly approached this Court.

7. This Court, in exercise of the powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution, cannot sit in appeal, more particularly in respect of varied medical opinions rendered by the Review Medical Board of the respondent authorities as well as the GMCH.

8. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for entertaining the writ petition.

9. Be that as it may, the petitioner is always at liberty to submit a representation along with the necessary documents before the Review Medical Board, and the Review Medical Board, on the basis thereof, may look into the same.

10. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions:

(i) In the present facts and circumstances of the case, as observed above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition.

Page No.# 5/5

(ii) The non-entertainment of the writ petition shall not preclude the petitioner from submitting a representation before the Review Medical Board of the respondents seeking reconsideration on the basis of the medical opinions available with the petitioner, as discussed above.

(iii) In the event any such representation is submitted within 10 (ten) days from today, the Review Medical Board of the respondents shall look into the same and do the needful in accordance with their guidelines within a period of 60 (sixty) days from the date of receipt of the representation.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant