CWP No.16594 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.16594 of 2009 Date of decision: 10.09.2010 Anil Kumar ....Petitioner Versus Union of India and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present: Mr. Naveen S. Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Vertika H. Singh, Advocate, for Ms. Geeta Singhwal, Advocate, for the respondents. VINOD K. SHARMA, J (ORAL) The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the memorandum (Annexure P-6) vide which the petitioner was declared as unfit for being appointed as driver ITB Police. The request of the petitioner for re-medical examination was also declined being not competent. This Court on 30.7.2010 passed the following order: - “The Indo-Tibet Border Police force advertised posts of Constable/Driver in the month of September, 2008. The petitioner being possessed the requisite educational and other qualifications applied for the post of Constable/Driver under OBC category. The petitioner appeared for physical test on 7.12.2008, which he qualified and was shortlisted for taking written test etc. In January, 2009, the petitioner being successful in the written test was called for driving test and was declared successful. He also succeeded in the personal interview held thereafter. After the completion of above formalities for recruitment, the petitioner was sent for medical fitness examination. The Medical Officer, found the petitioner to be unfit for the job by reporting that there was distance vision 6/12 in both CWP No.16594 of 2009 -2- eyes and there was deformity in right scapula, DNS right nose. The petitioner being dissatisfied with the report of the Medical Officer, got himself examined at General Hospital, Rewari. The Medical Officer/Civil Surgeon found him fit and issued a medical fitness certificate as prescribed for re-medical examination. The petitioner also filed an appeal before the Deputy Inspector General, Recruitment Board ITB Police Seemadwar (Dehradun) Uttrakhand, against his illegal rejection, along with the said medical fitness certificate issued by the General Hospital, Rewari. The request made by the petitioner was accepted and he was called for re-examination on 23.7.2009 at Base Hospital ITBP Tigri Camp, New Delhi. The petitioner was re-examined by the Medical Board on 23.7.2009. The Medical Board on re-examination did not find the petitioner to be fit because of defect in the eyes as noticed earlier while rejecting his case. In the re-medical examination the distance vision was found to be 6/6(P) both eyes, but it was reported, that the petitioner was suffering from 'ptosis left eye', therefore, was unfit. The case of the petitioner is that after the re-medical examination the petitioner approached Janki Eye Hospital, Rewari for getting medical treatment of the defect reported. However, the hospital reported that there was no defect in the eyes of the petitioner. In this case it is noticed, that though the petitioner was found medically unfit by the Medical Officer by describing his eye sight to be 6/12, both eyes. In the re-medical Board, the report of the Medical Officer was found to be wrong, but reconstituted Board rejected the petitioner on altogether a new ground, for which the petitioner had no opportunity, either to get treated, or explain the said defect. The subsequent report of the Hospital showing that the petitioner has no defect at all in his eye sight, casts doubt on the report of the re-medical examination also. This Court can not sit as an expert to given an opinion as to whether the report is correct or not. Therefore, in order to do justice to the petitioner, it will be appropriate to constitute a Medical Board of Senior Doctors of the PGI, Chandigarh, to examine the eyes of the petitioner to see, whether he is suffering from any defect, which may come in his way to perform the duties of Driver in the ITBP. The Director, PGI, Chandigarh is requested to constitute a CWP No.16594 of 2009 -3- Medical Board within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, to examine the petitioner, as per standards of the ITBP. The petitioner and the respondents are directed through their counsel to appear before the Director, PGI Chandigarh on 10.8.2010 at 10.00 A.M., for getting the date fixed for medical examination. The report of the Medical Examination be sent to this Court in a sealed cover by 30.8.2010.” In pursuance of the order passed by this Court, the petitioner was examined by the medical board in presence of the representatives of the parties. The report of the special medical board reads as under: - “MEDICAL EXAMINATION REPORT The Medical Board consisting of i.e. Prof Amod Gupta, Dr. Mangat Ram Dogra and Dr. Amit Gupta was constituted by the Medical Superintendent vide No.EV(9)PGI-MS/MA- 63/2010 dated 11.08.2010 in pursuance of order dated 30.7.2010 passed by Hon'able Mr. Justice Vinod K Sharma of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh in Civil Writ Petition No.16594 of 2009 titled Anil Kumar Vs. Union of India and others. Eye examination of Mr. Anil Kumar (vide CR No.2010 0184 5585) by the board members on 30.8.2010 revealed unaided visual acuity of 6/6 in both the eyes. Left eye revealed mild ptosis with good LPS action. Rest of the eye examination did not reveal any abnormality. His color vision was normal. In our opinion, Mr. Anil Kumar is fit for the post of Driver. Photocopy of the original record of examination is attached. M.R. Dogra Amit Gupta Additional Professor Associate Professor Department of Ophthalmology Department of Ophthalmology PGIMER, Chandigarh PGIMER, Chandigarh Prof Amod Gupta Head Department of Ophthalmology PGIMER, Chandigarh.” The petitioner has been declared to be medically fit for appointment as driver. In view of the report referred to above, the impugned order (Annexure P-6) is quashed, and the petitioner is declared to be medically fit. CWP No.16594 of 2009 -4- Consequently, it is directed that the case of the petitioner for appointment as driver now be considered by treating him to be medically fit for appointment. Needful be done within 15 days of the receipt of certified copy of this order. Writ petition is allowed in above mentioned terms. No costs. (Vinod K. Sharma) Judge September 10, 2010 R.S.