JUDGMENT Hon’ble V.K. Shukla, J.—In this bunch of writ petitions, the petitioners, who have been declared successful at the recruitment examination conducted by the U.P. Police Recruitment & Promotion Board, Lucknow (herein after referred to as “the Board”) for appointment on the post of constables in civil police, have approached this Court, challenging the order of the Board, wherein they have been declared medically unfit by the Regional Medical Board constituted at the Training Centres, whereas some of the petitioners have approached this Court on mere asking to appear before the Regional Medical Board constituted at the Training Centres for medical examination. 2. Factual situation which emerges in this bunch of writ petitions is that an advertisement dated 10.08.2009 was issued by the U.P. Police Recruitment & Promotion Board for recruitment on the post of constables in U.P. Civil Police, in pursuance of which the petitioners claim to have applied for consideration of their candidature. They appeared at the recruitment centres, undertook physical test and cleared medical test. Thereafter the petitioners were asked to undertake written examination, and on the merit status secured by them in the written test, their names were published. Petitioners claim that after selection had been made, they were asked to report at the respective Regional Training Centres, where they were supposed to produce their educational certificates, caste certificates and residence certificates. Petitioners claim that at the said point of time, without there being any authorization and without any order from the Police Establishment Board, Head Quarter, Allahabad, petitioners were further medically tested and have been declared unfit, and based on the same, they have been prevented from completing training, whereas in some of writ petitions petitioners have rushed to this Court resisting second medical examination. At this juncture, petitioners have rushed to this Court, complaining therein that under the U.P. (Civil Police) Constable and Head Constable Service Rules, 2008, there is no provision for re-examination by the Medical Board, whereas in the past, petitioners had already been declared medically fit, inasmuch as, there is no reason for the Training Centres to conduct fresh medical examination. 3. In respect of controversy involved in writ petitions, this Court had earlier asked the learned standing counsel to produce relevant records. Relevant records have been produced, as such with the consent of the parties; this bunch of writ petitions has been taken up for final hearing and disposal. 4. 3. In respect of controversy involved in writ petitions, this Court had earlier asked the learned standing counsel to produce relevant records. Relevant records have been produced, as such with the consent of the parties; this bunch of writ petitions has been taken up for final hearing and disposal. 4. Sri Sanjay Kumar, Sri Vijay Gautam, Sri Satya Prakash, Sri Rahul Sripat, Sri Ram Chandra Srivastava and Sri V.K. Singh, Advocates, representing the petitioners, contended with vehemence that entire exercise undertaken by the respondents for holding medical examination at the training Centres is totally without jurisdiction, in such a situation and in this background, declaration of petitioners being medically unfit in the garb of re-medical examination at the Training Centres is beyond the Rules, and the action taken is unjustifiable. Alternatively, it has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that infirmities, which have been pointed out, are not at all suffered by the petitioners and in very arbitrary manner, the petitioners have been declared medically unfit, and if at all re-medical examination is necessary, the petitioners are prepared to undergo second medical examination and said opportunity be provided to them. 5. Countering the said submissions, Sri Piyush Shukla, learned standing counsel, representing the respondents, on the other hand, contended that the incumbents, who are to be enrolled in police force, have to be medically and physically fit, and once it has been found that the petitioners are medically unfit, then they cannot be permitted to claim as a matter of right to be there as members of police force. It has also been contended that before according placement to an incumbent, it is inherent right of the employer to see that such an incumbent fulfills the requisite medical standard, as such before undertaking training at the Training Centres, the petitioners have been asked for second medical examination, and the petitioners cannot resist the same. It was further argued that in accordance with Rule 11of chapter III of Part II to IV of the Financial Hand Book further medical examination is required to be undertaken by the Medical Board if there is time gap of more than six months from the earlier medical examination, and further the action taken is in consonance with Rule 13 of the U.P. (Civil Police) Constable and Head Constable Service Rules, 2008. 6. 6. In order to appreciate the respective arguments advanced by the respective parties, the relevant Rules, which cover the field for selection and appointment on the post of constables in civil police is being looked into. In exercise of powers under clause (c) sub-section (2) Rules have been framed. These Rules are known as U.P. (Civil Police) Constable and Head Constable Service Rules, 2008. Rule 3 (b) deals with ‘’appointing authority’ and means the Superintendent of Police for constables and Head Constables in service. Rule 3 (c) deals with ‘’Board’ and means the U.P. Police Recruitment & Promotion Board, established in accordance with the Government Orders issued from time to time in this regard. Rule 3 (h) defines the ‘’Head of the Department’ and means the Director General of Police, U.P. Rule 3 (i) defines the ‘’members of service’ and means a person substantively appointed under these Rules or orders in force, prior to the commencement of these Rules to a post in the cadre of the service. Rule 3 (m) defines the Selection Committee and means the selection committee constituted by the Board for the selection of candidates for appointment to the post of the service. Rule 3 (n) deals with year of recruitment. Rule 4 deals with Cadre of Service, giving therein strength of service of each category of posts. Rule 5 deals with Source of Recruitment. Rule 6 deals with Reservation. Part IV of the Rules deals with ‘’Qualifications’. Rule 7 deals with Nationality. Rule 8 deals with Academic Qualifications. Rule 9 deals with Preferential Qualification. Rule 10 deals with age. Rule 11 deals with character. Rule 12 deals with marital status. Rule 13 deals with physical fitness; same being relevant to resolve the controversy is being extracted below : “13. No candidate shall be appointed to a post in the service unless he is in good mental and bodily health and free from any physical defect likely to interfere with the efficient performance of his duties. Before a candidate is finally approved for appointment he shall be required to pass an examination by a medical board. NOTE.—The medical board shall also examine the deficiencies such as knock knee, bow legs, flat feet, vericose veins, distant and near vision, colour blindness, hearing test comprising of Rinne’s test, Webber’s test and tests for vertigo etc.” 7. Rule 14 deals with determination of vacancies. NOTE.—The medical board shall also examine the deficiencies such as knock knee, bow legs, flat feet, vericose veins, distant and near vision, colour blindness, hearing test comprising of Rinne’s test, Webber’s test and tests for vertigo etc.” 7. Rule 14 deals with determination of vacancies. Rule 15 deals with procedure for direct recruitment of constable; same being relevant is being extracted below: “15. Procedure for direct recruitment of Constable.—The direct recruitment to the post of constable shall be made in the following manner : (a) Application : (i) a candidate shall fill the application Form for one District only. Regarding allocation of Examination center, the candidate may give more than one option. However, Board may allocate center other than those indicated by the candidate. (ii) a separate booklet shall be attached with the application Form containing the information regarding educational qualification, age, and minimum qualifying standard for each category of Physical Standard Test, Physical Efficiency Test, Medical fitness, and minimum qualifying marks for written examination subject wise, copy of O.M.R. sheet for practice. and other important guidelines; (iii) the application Form shall be on the O.M.R sheet. (iv) the space for candidates both left and right thumb impression shall be provided in the application Form; (v) two attested photograph of the candidate be pasted at proper places, one photo on the application Form and the other on the admission card ; (vi) application Form can be purchased on payment of the prescribed Fee from the notified Banks/Post Offices. (vii) every application Form must be accompanied with the attested copies of the certificate of age, 10th, 12th and Graduation/Post Graduation, Sports Certificate, National Cadet Corps Certificate, Home Guard Certificate, Caste and Dependent of fredom fighters Certificate, as the case may be. Duly filled up application forms should be submitted in the same Post Office/Bank from where it is so purchased. (b) Call Letter: The Board will ensure that all the certificates, submitted by the candidate will be examined before the issuance of the call letter. If a certificate is shown to be submitted in the application Form but not found attached with it, the application Form of the candidate may be cancelled. After getting the application Form scanned through computer, computerised call letter will be issued to eligible candidates through the same post office from where application Form has been purchased. If a certificate is shown to be submitted in the application Form but not found attached with it, the application Form of the candidate may be cancelled. After getting the application Form scanned through computer, computerised call letter will be issued to eligible candidates through the same post office from where application Form has been purchased. The Board may also use any other appropriate means of sending call letters after a thorough consideration. Code/name/postal address/place of the examination centre alongwith the date and time of the Physical Standard Test, Physical Efficiency Test and medical examination will be clearly mentioned in the call letter. Documents which the candidates are required to bring for the examination will be clearly indicated in the call letters. Call letters should reach at least a week before the beginning of the examination. In case call letter is not received till a week before the date of beginning of the examination candidates may contact helpline, serial code of the application Form will have to be given in this regard. Duplicate call letter will be issued by the Board. (c) Physical Standard Test: All eligible candidates shall appear for a physical Standard Test of a qualifying nature, the procedure of which is given in Appendix-1. (d) Physical Efficiency Test: The candidates who are declared successful in the Physical Standard test under Rule 15 (c) shall be required to appear in a Physical Efficiency Test of a qualifying nature, the procedure of which is given in Appendix-2 (e) Medical Examination: The candidates declared successful in the Physical Efficiency Test shall be required to appear in a Medical Examination Test, the procedure of which is given in Appendix-3 (f) Written Examination: The candidates declared successful in Medical Examination Test shall be required to appear in Written Examination, the procedure of which is given in Appendix-4 (g) Final Select List: The Board shall prepare a Final Select List of candidates in order of their merit, keeping in view the reservation policy of the State. The final merit list shall be published in website/notice board and news papers along with the marks obtained by the candidates, so they can check their marks obtained by them irrespective of the fact whether they are fail or pass. The outsourced agency shall develop the appropriate software on the basis of district and category wise merit list. The final merit list shall be published in website/notice board and news papers along with the marks obtained by the candidates, so they can check their marks obtained by them irrespective of the fact whether they are fail or pass. The outsourced agency shall develop the appropriate software on the basis of district and category wise merit list. The district and category wise merit lists shall be published accordingly. The outsourced agency which conducted the written examination will furnish the list of marks obtained by the candidates signed by its competent authority in a sealed cover along with the answer sheets to the Chairman of the Board.” 8. Part VI of the Rules deals with Training, Appointment, Probation, Confirmation and Seniority. Rule 18 deals with appointment. Rule 19 deals with Training and Rule 20 deals with Probation. Rules 19 and 20 are also being excerpted below : “18. Appointment.—Appointments are made strictly in accordance with the merit list following the Rules and Government Orders regarding reservation of Scheduled Casts, Scheduled Tribes and other categories of special classes. The verification of character and certificates shall be completed in one month. After that the Board will made available the list of selected candidates to the concerned Senior Superintendent of police/ Superintendent of police for issuing appointment letters. Senior Superintendent of police/ Superintendent of police will issue the appointment letter with an instruction that the selected candidates shall join their duty/training within a month failing which the other candidates of the select list will be given the appointment. Provided that any person appointed before the commencement of these Rules to a post under the service and working on that post shall be deemed to have been appointed substantively under these Rules and such substantive appointment shall be deemed to have been made under these rules. 19. Training.—During probation period the probationer is required to undergo training as prescribed by the State Government or Head of the Department. 20. Probation.—(1) A person on substantive appointment to a post in the service shall be placed on probation for a period of two years. (2) The appointing authority may, for reasons to be recorded, extend the period of probation in individual cases specifying the date up to which extension is granted: Provided that, save in exceptional circumstances, the period of probation shall not be extended beyond one year and in no circumstances, beyond two years. (2) The appointing authority may, for reasons to be recorded, extend the period of probation in individual cases specifying the date up to which extension is granted: Provided that, save in exceptional circumstances, the period of probation shall not be extended beyond one year and in no circumstances, beyond two years. (3) If it appears to the appointing authority at any time during or at the end of the period or extended period of probation that a probationer has not made sufficient improvement during the extended period of probation to the satisfaction of the appointing authority he may be reverted to his substantive post, if any, and if he does not hold a lien on any post, his services may be dispensed with. (4) A probationer who is reverted or whose services are dispensed with under sub Rule (3) shall not be entitled to any compensation. (5) The appointing authority may allow continuous service, rendered in an officiating or temporary capacity in a post included in the cadre or any other equivalent or higher post to be taken into account for the purpose of computing the period of probation.” 9. Part VII of the Rules deals with other provisions. Rule 26 clearly provides in respect of regulation of other matters; it being relevant is quoted below: “26. Regulation of other matters.—In regard to the matters not specifically covered by these Rules or special orders persons appointed to the service shall be governed by the rules, regulations and orders applicable generally to Government Servants serving in connection with the affairs of the State.” 10. Alongwith Rule 15, Appendix- 3 has been provided; same provides as follows: “APPENDIX-3 Medical Examination for direct recruitment Medical Examination Board.—The candidates who have passed the Physical Efficiency Test will undergo the Medical Examination at notified centers, (District Community Health Centre, District Hospital and Tehsil Community Health Centre) by medical board constituted by the Chief Medical Officer of the District. The number of candidates (not more than 50 in one day) for each medical board shall be determined in such a way that it will not affect the procedure and quality of the Medical Examination. The Medical Examination shall be completed within a week in the entire State. The number of candidates (not more than 50 in one day) for each medical board shall be determined in such a way that it will not affect the procedure and quality of the Medical Examination. The Medical Examination shall be completed within a week in the entire State. Due to the excess number of candidates if more time is required the Police Service Recruitment and Promotion Board may take a decision and decide the time required at its own level. The minimum requirement for qualifying for medical test to be displayed very prominently on Boards, District Community Health Centre, District Hospital and Tehsil Community Health Centre where ever the test is conducted before conducting the examination. (a) The Doctors will examine the candidates in accordance with the Medical Manual. The medical board mainly examines the deficiencies of human body such as knock knee, bow legs, flat feet, varicose veins, distant and near vision, colour blindness, hearing test comprising of Rinne’s test, Webber’s test and tests for vertigo etc. Board may conduct other examination after obtaining the opinion of experts. (b) The result will be displayed on board and declared on mike every day at the end of the day and also updated on the Board’s website wherever possible. (c) The members of the medical board who are found to give the wrong report willfully will be liable for criminal proceedings. (d) The Medical Examination is only qualifying in nature and it has no effect on the merit list.” 11. As per parameters of the provisions quoted above, it would be seen that after a candidate has applied for consideration of his candidature by filling up the application form in one district only, then the Board has to ensure that all the certificates are examined before issuance of call letter. On receipt of call letter eligible candidate has to appear for physical standard test of a qualifying nature, the procedure of which is given in Appendix-1. On receipt of call letter eligible candidate has to appear for physical standard test of a qualifying nature, the procedure of which is given in Appendix-1. The candidates, who are declared successful in the physical standard test under Rule 15 (c) will have to undergo physical efficiency test as per Appendix-2, and the candidates declared successful in the physical efficiency test are required to appear in medical examination, the procedure of which is given in Appendix-3, and then as per Rule 15 (f) the candidates declared successful medical examination are required to appear in written examination, the procedure of which is given in Appendix-4. As per Rule 15 (g) The Board shall prepare a final select list of candidates in order of their merit, keeping in view the reservation policy of the State. Final select list is thereafter to be published. Rule 16 provides that before issuing appointment letter, it is essential to complete the character verification. It is inclusive of verification of character and criminal records of the candidates. Thereafter appointment letter has to be issued strictly in accordance with the Rules and the Government Orders, and the incumbent is required to undergo training during the probation period. 12. The issue raised in this bunch of writ petitions is as to whether second medical examination is permissible or not. The scheme of things provided for clearly reflects that once an incumbent has cleared physical standard test and physical efficiency test as provided under Rule 15 (c) and (d), then a candidate is required to undergo medical examination, as per the procedure given in Appendix-3 and only after clearance is made on physical standard front, physical efficiency front and medical examination front, the candidate is required to appear in written examination. All these three steps are qualifying in nature. Thereafter, based upon his merit status final select list is to be prepared, and then character verification has to be done followed by appointment letter. The medical examination which has been provided for under Rule 15 (e) is a part and parcel of the procedure for recruitment and in effect is screening exercise to see and ensure that an incumbent with shortcomings does not undertake written examination. The medical examination is only qualifying in nature, and it has no effect on the merit list. 13. The medical examination which has been provided for under Rule 15 (e) is a part and parcel of the procedure for recruitment and in effect is screening exercise to see and ensure that an incumbent with shortcomings does not undertake written examination. The medical examination is only qualifying in nature, and it has no effect on the merit list. 13. The question is as to when once final select list has been prepared and published, can second medical examination be undertaken or not. Rule 13 of the U.P. (Civil Police) Constable and Head Constable Service Rules, 2008 casts an obligation on the appointing authority to see and ensure that no candidate is appointed to a post in the service unless he is in good mental and bodily health and free from any physical defect likely to interfere with the efficient performance of his duties. Before a candidate is finally approved for appointment he shall be required to pass an examination by a medical board. Key word in the said Rule is that before a candidate is finally approved for appointment, he is required to pass an examination by a medical board. Final approval for appointment is feasible only after the name of the candidate finds place in the merit list, then at the said point of time the appointing authority is vested with the authority to see and ensure that an incumbent passes examination by medical board. This exercise has to be undertaken at the level of the appointing authority before he offers appointment. This exercise is double check to see and ensure that no incumbent should intrude in the service with short comings on medical front. In such a situation and in this background, such a requirement has been mentioned in the Rules. This exercise has to be undertaken at the level of the appointing authority before he offers appointment. This exercise is double check to see and ensure that no incumbent should intrude in the service with short comings on medical front. In such a situation and in this background, such a requirement has been mentioned in the Rules. The requirement under Rule 13 clearly shows distinction between the requirement as is provided for under Rule 15 (e) and Rule 13, inasmuch as, requirement of first medical examination under Rule 15 (e) is for the purposes of screening out a candidate, inasmuch as, in case the candidate is found medically unfit at the said juncture, then he cannot go forward and appear in written examination, same is part and parcel of qualifying examination, whereas second medical examination under Rule 13, the same is couched in a very mandatory language that before a candidate is finally approved for appointment, he shall be required to pass examination by medical board. Thus, these are two different stages envisaged under the 2008 Rules. In such a situation and in this background, the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners that under 2008 Rules there is no provision of second medical examination by medical board, cannot be accepted and approved. 14. There is one more reason for not accepting the argument and the same is that in accordance with Rule 11 of Chapter III of Part II to IV of the Financial Hand Book issued by Government of U.P., medical examination is required to be undertaken by medical board again if there is time gap of more than six months from earlier examination by medical board. Rule 26 clearly provides that in regard to the matters not specifically covered by these Rules or special orders persons appointed to the service shall be governed by the rules, regulations and orders applicable generally to Government Servants serving in connection with the affairs of the State. 15. In the present case, accepted position is that when earlier medical examination had taken place, six months’ period was already over, and this particular provision clearly authorised the authority concerned to hold second medical examination. In this view of the fact also the action taken by the respondents cannot be faulted. The grievance raised by the petitioners that second medical examination is not permissible cannot be accepted. 16. In this view of the fact also the action taken by the respondents cannot be faulted. The grievance raised by the petitioners that second medical examination is not permissible cannot be accepted. 16. Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CAR v. Shashi Gupta, AIR 1994 SC 1241 , has clearly taken the view that medical fitness is the sine qua non for appointment to public service. It is inherent right of an employer to be satisfied about medical fitness of person before offering appointment. Importance of medical fitness vis-a-vis member of disciplined force, specially police constables, and that the services of petitioners, on probation can be turned down, being medically unfit, has been considered at length in the case of Prem Pal Singh v. State of U.P., 2007 (9) ADJ 8 . Said judgment has been affirmed in Special Appeal No. 1573 of 2007, Arvind Kumar Sonkar v. State of U.P., decided on 21.11.2007, and Medical Board was set up for further medical examination. 17. Once this is the factual scenario that some of the petitioners have been declared medically unfit and some are objecting to appear in second medical examination, and some have failed on the first occasion in medical test, but wrongly took the written examination. There are some candidates, who have failed to fulfill physical standard test as well as physical efficiency test. This Court cannot come to rescue of the petitioners, especially when they are going to be enrolled as members of the police force, wherein the incumbents, who are not fit in terms of Rule 13 of 2008 Rules cannot be enrolled. The view taken by the respondents is in furtherance of the provisions as provided for under Rule 13 of 2008 Rules read with Rule 11 of Chapter III of Part II to IV of the Financial Hand Book, and as such on the said score, petitioners legitimately can have no grievance. 18. Now the next issue is being looked into. Here in the present case, in some cases on second occasion, the petitioners have been found medically unfit and in some cases, the petitioners are opposing the second medical examination, whereas in some cases, the petitioners were declared unfit in first medical examination, but in spite of the same, they have succeeded in appearing in written examination. Here in the present case, in some cases on second occasion, the petitioners have been found medically unfit and in some cases, the petitioners are opposing the second medical examination, whereas in some cases, the petitioners were declared unfit in first medical examination, but in spite of the same, they have succeeded in appearing in written examination. As only issue is as to whether the petitioners are medically fit or not, and each one of them has been contending that he is medically fit and even the Board has taken decision to proceed on 28.01.2011 with further medical examination, who have been found unfit; in such a situation and in this background in respect of each one of the petitioners, the Board is directed to constitute a Special Medical Board at Lucknow giving opportunity to each one of the petitioners to undertake medical test and in the light of the report submitted by this Special Medical Board further follow-up action be taken into account, and decision be taken in accordance therewith. Such action be taken within eight weeks. The candidates, who have failed to fulfill physical standard test as well as physical efficiency test, qua them, it is hereby directed that their appointing authority, who is vested with the authority to issue appointment letter, shall make arrangement for re-examination of physical standard test as well as physical efficiency test, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and further follow-up action be taken accordingly. 19. All the writ petitions stand disposed of accordingly. —————