IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1142 of 2007 JITENDRA PRASAD SINGH Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS ----------- 3/ 23/9/2008. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner was an applicant for the post of Constable (General Duty) in the C.R.P.F. On 29.5.2006 he was declared temporarily unfit due to mild knock knee and right scrotal swelling with an observation for a review within 12 weeks. On 4.9.2006 he was required to appear for a fresh medical test at his own cost. The counter affidavit avers that the petitioner was found temporarily unfit and was observed to be reviewed within 12 weeks. In the review on 19.9.2006 he has again been declared medically unfit. On 2.4.2007 he has again undergone a medical examination and was found medically unfit. The final medical report of the petitioner dated 2.4.2007 does not refer to his mild knock knee. Even the scar found on 19.9.2006 which was suspected to be amenable to rigorous physical activities does not find mention. It refers only to scar from a hernia operation undergone by the petitioner and which was likely to be affected by rigorous physical activities.It also records absence of hernial swelling, - 2 - but that the muscles were weak. That with the advancement of medical science, ailments which were once considered grave requiring major surgeries are now being treated in better scientific ways requiring least interference with the human body and the modes of recovery as also medicines available for recovery have drastically changed. If the appointment has to be made to a Para Military force, the question of physical fitness is for the appointing authority to decide and not for the Court. This Court, in the facts and circumstances, is satisfied that if that be the only physical infirmity of the petitioner due to a surgery undergone by him, this Court would have expected the respondents to reconsider their decision of the physical fitness of the petitioner keeping in mind the normal period required for recovery from such surgeries unless there be a major defect in surgery leaving him with a permanent impairment. Let such consideration be done within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and a reasoned order be passed thereupon, if a decision prejudicial to the petitioner is proposed to be passed. The writ application is disposed off. KC ( Navin Sinha,J ) - 3 -