Judgment V.K. Bali, J.-The appellant even though qualified the elementary test for the post of Constable-Driver in the police department, was not appointed as he was found to be suffering from colour blindness, not only by the Medical Board but also the SMS Medical College and Hospital, Jaipur. The appellant had challenged the report of the medical examination by the Medical Board and the said Board, as mentioned above, had found him suffering form colour blindness. On further challenge by the appellant, even the SMS Medical College and Hospital, Jaipur found him to be colour blind. A medical board was also constituted to examine him. The Commandant, 6th Bn, RAC, Dholpur informed the appellant that as per the report received from the medical board, the disqualification of colour blindness still persisted. 2. Civil writ petition filed by the appellant challenging the findings of various medical boards was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide impugned order dated 05.03.2001. It is against this order that the present appeal has been filed under Section 18, Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949. 3. We have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and have examined the record of the case, we find no merit, whatsoever in the two fold contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant that some observations made by the medical board go in favour of the appellant and further that, another person who too was found to be colour blind, was appointed as a Constable-Driver by the respondent State and therefore, the action of the respondents in not appointing the appellant was discriminatory. The report of the medical board, that has been shown to us during the course of arguments, even though may have some observations in favour of the appellant but in the ultimate analysis, still holds the appellant to be colour blind. 4. The point with regard to hostile discrimination violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India has been raised, for the first time, during the pendency of the appeal on the basis of the contentions made in the rejoinder. 4. The point with regard to hostile discrimination violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India has been raised, for the first time, during the pendency of the appeal on the basis of the contentions made in the rejoinder. Even though the Hon’ble Bench then seized of the matter at one point of time, gave time to the respondents to verify the fact with regard to the case of Laxman Singh who too was stated to be colour blind and was appointed, we find no necessity to further probe the matter as surely, Article 14 of the Constitution of India cannot be pressed into service in comparing the illegalities. We find no merit whatsoever in the appeal and hence, it is dismissed.