IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA LPA No. 140 of 2011 Date of decision: 14.07.2011 ________________________________________________________________ State of H.P. & ors. .....Appellants.. Versus Amit & another. .....Respondents. Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, J. 1 Whether approved for reporting? No. ________________________________________________________________ For the appellants: Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. AG. For the respondents: Mr. B.S. Ranjan, Advocate. V.K. Sharma, J. Judgment dated 01.12.2010, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP(T) No. 7909 of 2008, Amit vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, operative part whereof is as follows, is under challenge in the present letters patent appeal: “Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabove, the petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to reconsider the petitioner for the post of constable and thereafter to post him in any of the branches/wings where a person with partial red-green colour vision defect can discharge his normal duties. Needful be done within a period of two months after production of certified copy of this judgment. The pending application(s). If any also stands disposed of. No costs.” 2. The direction issued by the learned Single Judge is based on the observations made in para 5 of the impugned judgment dated 01.12.2010, which are as under: “Petitioner has qualified all the tests, i.e. ground test, physical test, written test and personal interview. He was sent for medical examination vide letter dated 21.3.2001 and the Medical Superintendent, Zonal Hospital, Solan had found the petitioner unfit due to his 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. ...2... colour vision. He has been examined by the duly constituted Medical Board at Indira Gandhi Medical College. He has been found only suffering from partial red-green colour vision defect. The Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is in a position to discharge the duties in other wings of the Police Department due to his partial red-green colour vision defect. They are required to discharge ministerial duties as well in the office. The claim of the petitioner could not be outrightly rejected as per contents of the supplementary affidavit without taking into consideration that it was a case of partial red-green colour vision defect and not full colour vision defect.” 3. After hearing the learned Additional Advocate General and the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 and taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, we are more than satisfied that the conclusions drawn by the learned Single Judge and the direction passed on the same are perfectly legal and valid and there is no lawful cause or basis for any interference with the same. The discretion has been rightly exercised and the view is certainly a plausible one. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 4. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of, so also pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph) Chief Justice (Justice V.K. Sharma) Judge 14th July, 2011 (virender) V.K. Sharma, J.