CWP No. 2221 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 2221 of 2009 Date of Decision: 7.12.2009 Manpeet Singh ...Petitioner Vs. National Fertilizers Limited ...Respondent CORAM Hon'ble Mr.Justice Vinod K.Sharma Present: Mr.Pankaj Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Nilesh Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the respondent. --- 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest? --- Vinod K.Sharma, J . (Oral The petitioner by way of this writ petition seeks writ of certiorari to quash the order Annexure P.8 vide which offer of appointment CWP No. 2221 of 2009 2 on the post of Technician Grade-V (Instrumentation) has been ordered to be cancelled. The petitioner was working as apprentice with the respondent when an advertisement was issued inviting application for the post of Technician Grade-V (Instrumentation). The petitioner being eligible applied for the post. The petitioner has the qualification of Diploma in Instrumentation and Control Engineering, from Vaish Technical Institute, Rohtak. The petitioner after being interviewed was found eligible for the post and was issued an offer of appointment. The petitioner was subjected to medical examination wherein Medical Board reported as under:- “ Mr.Manpreet Singh son of Shri Mohinder Singh 26 years Male has been examined by three Ophthalmologists in Eye OPD vide Eye OPD No.28803 dated 15.10.2008 and Card No.0659306 and the findings are as under in duplicate: Vision - Right Eye-6/6 Left Eye-6/6 Anterior Segment B/E- within normal Limits. Fundus Both Eyes- within normal limits Colour Vision On testing of Ishihara Plates, the candidate is not able to identify or is missing some of the plates but he is not able to identify all the primary/basic colours of lantem test. CWP No. 2221 of 2009 3 Hence, the case may be decided as per the requirement of the medical standards laid down for the said job.” In view of the report of the Medical Board the impugned order was passed by the respondent cancelling the offer of appointment. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order primarily on the ground that the medical report submitted by the Medical Board has been wrongly interpreted by the respondent in coming to the conclusion that the petitioner is ineligible for the post. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the respondent has not given the job requirement to the Medical Board to assess as to whether the petitioner was fit for the job or not. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order cannot be sustained as specific medical report was required to be obtained, keeping in view the qualification of the petitioner, and also the fact that the petitioner had been apprentice with the respondent and successfully completed the job assigned to him in that capacity. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Manish Kumar Jain Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. And others 2008 (2) SCT 563, wherein Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has been pleased to lay down as under:- “23. It needs no emphasis that career of a candidate cannot be CWP No. 2221 of 2009 4 marred by an ambiguous opinion of a Medical Board concerning defective colour perception. Although vision test required for assessing the medical fitness of a candidate may be for multiple purposes, like; the interest of public safety; and the interest of administration and the interest of employee himself but at the same time the medical opinion with regard to the colour perception has to be clear, categorical and unambiguous. The whole idea of examining the selected candidate for medical fitness is to find out whether the person so selected is capable of performing his duties for which he has been selected or not. If he is not medically fit or capable of performing the duties for which he has been selected, his candidature has to be rejected. The standards fixed in the Rules for the performance of physical fitness clearly provide that inability to distinguish principal colours shall be regarded as a disqualification. Defecting colour perception to some extent may not render the selected candidate medically unfit since such candidate may still not fall in the category of, 'inability to distinguish principal colours.' 24. For want of any categorical finding by the Medical Board and for want of any standards in the Rules that the JTO requires higher grade of colour perception, the request of the petitioner for re-medial examination was not unreasonable. As a matter of fairness, it was expected of the respondent Nos. 1 CWP No. 2221 of 2009 5 and 2 to ask the petitioner to reappear before the Medical Board after the Medical Board was informed of the duties and responsibilities of the JTO and a specific opinion was sought as to whether the petitioner was fit or unfit for the post of JTO. After all selected candidate cannot be deprived of the employment on a vague medical opinion. 25. In what we have discussed above, we are of the view that the cancellation of the petitioner's candidature for the post of JTO on he ground of his physical unfitness on the basis of vague medical report was improper and unfair. The denial for re-medial examination despite the request made by the petitioner was also unreasonable.” The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, support the action taken by the respondent on the plea that as the colour vision of the petitioner has been detected as “colour blind” he cannot be offered a job, because it will not be possible for him to effectively perform his duties. The job requirement requires that he has to work in Electronic 'Printed Circuit Boards' (PCB), which requires colour distinction. The dispute in the present is covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Manish Kumar Jain Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. And others (supra). Consequently, the impugned order is set aside and the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: i) That the respondent shall now refer the petitioner CWP No. 2221 of 2009 6 to Medical Board for remedical examination. The Medical Board so constituted shall be informed about the duties and responsibilities of the Technician Grade-V (Instrumentation). ii) Get a categorical opinion from the Board as to whether the petitioner would be capable of performing the duties and whether he is capable to distinguish the colour required for the job. iii) The petitioner shall be informed well in time the date and time on which he has to appear before the Medical Board. Therefore, in the light of medical opinion about the fitness of the petitioner, the respondent shall be permitted to take appropriate action in accordance with law. No costs. (Vinod K.Sharma) 07.12.2009 Judge rp