Judgment :- The Original Application in O.A.No.872 of 2002 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal is the present writ petition. 2. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondents. 3. The petitioner was provisionally selected for the post of Grade - II Police Constable. However, since he was not medically fit, he was not issued the order of appointment. The petitioner states in paragraph 6(G) of his application that the report of the Medical Board found him unfit, is incorrect. According to him, he got examined by a Government Doctor and he enclosed the copy of the certificate issued by the Government Doctor to the effect that he is free from any heart disease. 4. The respondents filed reply affidavit. In para 6 of the reply affidavit, it is stated as follows: "6. Thiru V. Ramesh, the applicant, in Original Application No.872 of 2002 was declared unfit for having heart disease, Hypertension LVH (Border Line) by the duly constituted Medical Board of Government Doctors at Tiruvallur Government Hospital". 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner heavily relies on a decision dated 30.07.2008 of a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.339 of 2008, wherein, the appellant in that case disputed the correctness of the certificate of the Medical Board and the Division Bench directed the appellant to deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/-in cash with the Registrar General of this Court and the appellant was sent for re-examination by a Special Medical Board at the Government General Hospital, Chennai. Ultimately, the Special Medical Board found him that he was fit and an order of appointment was also issued. In the aforesaid order, it is stated that if the assertion was found to be incorrect, the appellant would have to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/-deposited with the Registrar General of this Court, to the Government. Since the Special Medical Board found that the appellant was without any defect, the Division Bench also directed the Registry to refund the deposited amount to the appellant. 6. However, the learned Government Advocate strenuously contends that the constitution of Special Medical Board as directed by the order of the Division Bench could not be applied to this case, as the selection of Grade II Police Constable was of the year 1997-1998. 6. However, the learned Government Advocate strenuously contends that the constitution of Special Medical Board as directed by the order of the Division Bench could not be applied to this case, as the selection of Grade II Police Constable was of the year 1997-1998. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the delay in disposal of his case was not due to the fault on the part of the petitioner. The learned counsel further submits that the Tribunal ceased to exist and later the Original Application was transferred to this Court. Hence, the pendency of the case could not be put against the petitioner. 7. I am in entire agreement with the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, as the petitioner should not be made to suffer for the delay in the disposal of the case. 8. In view of the aforesaid order of the Division Bench of this Court, a direction is issued to the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/-in cash with the Registrar General of this Court, within two weeks from today and the Government is directed to re-examine the petitioner by a Special Medical Board to be constituted in the Government General Hospital, Chennai within a period of four thereafter. If the Special Medical Board found that the petitioner was not fit, the amount deposited by the petitioner would be paid to the State. If it is otherwise, it would be refunded to the petitioner and the petitioner is entitled for appointment. 9. With the above said directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.