Civil Writ Petition No.18983 of 2009(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.18983 of 2009(O&M) Date of Decision: August 08, 2011 Sunil Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr. R.K Malik, Senior Advocate, with Mr. S.K. Redhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana, for the State. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. In the year 2007, applications were invited for filling up of 485 posts of Computer Operator Constables (Male) in Haryana Police. The candidates were to apply in the office of Deputy Commissioner of Police Commissionrate Gurgaon-cum-Chairman Selection Board, Gurgaon. The petitioner submitted his application and was selected on 18.12.2008. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared for medical examination before the Chief Medical Officer, Civil Hospital Karnal, but was found medically unfit. The petitioner had been referred to PGIMS, Rohtak, for medical examination and for getting opinion as to whether he is fit for appointment or not. The Medical Board of ENT Doctors also the Department sought clarification regarding the criteria for the post of temporary Computer Civil Writ Petition No.18983 of 2009(O&M) -2- Operator Constable as the same was not available with them. The Civil Surgeon Karnal, intimated the criteria. The Board of Doctors then opined keeping in view the previous report supplied by the Civil Surgeon Karnal. The petitioner was considered unfit for the post of Computer Operator Constable. Not satisfied with the result, the petitioner got himself medically examined from Jindal Institute of Medical Sciences, Model Town, Hisar, where he got an opinion in his favour being fit for all types of duties. The petitioner statedly got himself medically examined from AIIMS Hospital, New Delhi, where again he has been found fit. The petitioner, thereafter, has approached this Court seeking direction for appointment on that basis. Merely because the petitioner has medical opinion in his favour from a private institute or AIIMS, which is not aware of or is not apprised of the medical standard required for the job, would not help the petitioner. The prayer made that the petitioner be referred for further medical examination at PGI Chandigarh, is neither fair nor reasonable. The petitioner has not made any allegation either against the Doctors or any appointing authority for which he was declared unfit for appointment. Merely because the petitioner considering himself fit or has been so declared by a private institution is not good ground to direct his fresh medical examination by PGI Chandigarh. No case for interference, thus, is made out. Dismissed. August 08, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) monika JUDGE