IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WPSS No. 7 of 2007 Surendra Singh ….…..Petitioner. Versus Commandant Indo Tibetan Boarder Police & another. ……….Respondents. Ms. Shruti Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. Anjali Bhargava, learned counsel for the respondents. 18th September, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. This writ petition is directed against the orders dated 8.12.2005 and the order dated 4.8.2006 contained as Annexure No. 3 & 7 to the writ petition. 2. The petitioner was working in Indo Tibetan Border Police on the post of Washer man (Dhobhi), which comes under the category of Group-D post. His services were terminated on the ground that he was found medically unfit on account of vision weakness in the left eye. 3. I have seen the medical examination report, whereby the petitioner was referred to Chandigarh for treatment and also the report of the Board, by which he was held to be incapacitated. The nature of the disease is not as such, which could have incapacitated to the petitioner for the job he was appointed. This aspect could have been seen in the appeal, but the appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed on 4.8.2006 only on the ground that it was belated by 90 days. 2 4. The appellate Authority should have taken the lenient view and should have decided the appeal on merits. Therefore, orders dated 8.12.2005 and 24.8.2005 passed by the respondent no. 1 are quashed. 5. Writ petition is allowed along with the urgency application. The appellate Authority is directed to decide the appeal of the petitioner on merits within a period of one month from the date of production of the certified copy of this order. 6. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) 16.9.2008 Rathour