IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 7909 of 2008. Decided on: 01.12.2010. __________________________________________________________ Amit. … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes. For the Petitioner : Mr. B.S. Ranjan, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, J. (oral): The interview for recruitment to the post of Constable was held by the respondent-State with effect from 12th February to 17th February, 2001 at Solan. Petitioner qualified ground test, physical test, written test and personal interview. He was sent for medical examination vide letter dated 21.3.2001. The Medical Superintendent of Zonal Hospital, Solan found the petitioner unfit. According to the medical certificate issued by the Medical Superintendent, Zonal Hospital, Solan, the petitioner was found medically unfit due to his colour vision. Petitioner approached the erstwhile learned Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal for the 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. - 2 - redressal of his grievance. The learned Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal passed the following order on 6.11.2001:- “The applicant has been selected as constable in the Police Department and he was examined by the Medical Board in Solan and he was found to have been colour blindness to Red Colour. The Principal, IGMC is directed to constitute a Medical Board to examine the applicant whether he is having colour blindness to Red colour. The applicant is directed to appear before the Principal, IGMC, Shimla on 12.11.2001. Dasti copy of this order be supplied to the learned counsel for the applicant as also the Learned Addl. Advocate General and he shall inform the Principal that the applicant shall be reporting before him on 12.11.2001 at 10.30 AM for medical examination. ‘Dasti’ In sequel thereto, the petitioner was examined by the Medical Board. According to the pleadings, petitioner was suffering from partial red-green colour vision defect. Respondent-State was directed to file supplementary affidavit whether the petitioner was fit as per report of Indira Gandhi Medical College or not. Supplementary affidavit was filed by the State and as per contents of supplementary affidavit, petitioner was not medically fit as per Annexures R-1 and R-2. 2. Mr. B.S. Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that his client had already qualified the ground test, physical test, written test and personal interview. According to him, medical certificate issued by the Medical Superintendent, Zonal Hospital, Solan was not proper. It is in these circumstances that his client was medically examined by the duly constituted Medical Board at Indira Gandhi Medical College. According to him, his client has been found suffering - 3 - from partial red-green colour vision defect, which according to him will not hamper the discharge of duties of a constable. 3. Mr. P.M. Negi, learned Deputy Advocate General has vehemently argued that the petitioner has not been found medically fit and accordingly there is no illegality in the action of the respondents whereby the petitioner has not been recruited to the post of constable. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the pleadings carefully. 5. 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 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. All the constables recruited are not put on regular police duties. 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. 6. 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 - 4 - months after production of certified copy of this judgment. The pending application(s), if any also stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. December 01, 2010. (sck).