IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 10619 of 2008 Between: P. Koteswara Rao S/o Sri yesu R/o Vellalur Village & Post, Punnuru Mandal, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State Bank of India, rep byits Chief General Manager, Local Head Office, bank Street, Koti, Hyderabad. 2 The Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Human Resources Section, Zonal Office, Vijayawada-520 010/ .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus, declare the action of the respondent in rejecting the appointment of the petitioner as Armed Guard through its Letter dated 24-04-2008 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner to the post of Armed Guard in the respondent organization and also extend all consequential and incidental benefits attached to the Post on par with similarly situated candidates, and pass such other order or order Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.N.SIVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: MR.DEEPAK BHATTACHARJEE The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner retired from Army in the year 2001 and got enrolled with Zilla Sainik Board for alternative appointment. He applied to State Bank of India, the first respondent herein, for appointment as Armed Guard. The second respondent issued proceedings, dated 28.03.2008, selecting the petitioner as Armed Guard. It was pointed out that the orders of appointment would be issued on the petitioner on being found medically fit. The petitioner was examined by a Doctor empanelled by the Bank and on the basis of the opinion rendered by him, he was treated medically unfit. Through a communication, dated 24.04.2008, the petitioner was informed that he cannot be issued orders of appointment, since he was found medically unfit. The same is challenged in this writ petition. The petitioner contends that he underwent treatment in Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences (N.I.M.S.) in October, 2002 for a minor ailment and after completion of the treatment, the hospital has declared him as medically fit to perform duties. He contends that though he filed a certificate issued by the N.I.M.S., the same was not taken into account. The respondents filed a counter-affidavit admitting that the petitioner was selected to the post of Armed Guard, but was not issued orders of appointment, since he was found medically unfit. It is also stated that constituting a Medical Board to review the case of the petitioner is in the discretion and it cannot be claimed as a right. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. From a perusal of the proceedings, dated 28.03.2008, it is evident that the petitioner was selected in the recruitment process. The order of appointment was to follow after the examination of the petitioner as to his fitness. The petitioner was examined, and ultimately, his case was rejected, vide proceedings, dated 24.04.2008. The Doctor, who has examined the petitioner, had made his own observations, and ultimately, opined that the petitioner is medically unfit. This Court cannot sit as an appellate authority over such opinion. However, in view of the serious dispute raised by the petitioner, supported by a certificate issued by the N.I.M.S. as recently as on 09.04.2008, the case of the petitioner deserves to be considered by the Medical Board. How so ever accurate the opinion expressed by a Medical Officer may be, the career of an individual cannot be shattered. Reference of a case to a Medical Board would ensure objectivity and avoid any doubt as to arbitrariness. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that the second respondent shall refer the case of the petitioner to the Medical Board as per the rules prevailed in the organization, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The further action would depend upon the outcome of the findings of the Medical Board. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:18.07.2008 kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}