Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1133 (JHR)

Dharmesh Kumar Hansh v. Union Of India

2017-07-14

S.N.PATHAK

body2017
JUDGMENT S.N. Pathak, J. - The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to declare him medically fit for appointment on the post of Head Constable (Ministerial) in BSF 2010. Factual Matrix: 2. It is a case of the petitioner that advertisement was floated by the respondents on 27.03.2010 in the employment Newspaper for appointment of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Stenographer) and Head Constable (Ministerial) for Hazaribagh, Delhi Centre. Subsequently, only the post for Head Constable (Ministerial) was enhanced for 1112 posts in place of 504 posts and the last date for submitting the application form was also extended to 25.05.2010 vide advertisement dated 14.04.1010 published in the local newspaper. Pursuant to aforesaid advertisement, the petitioner applied for the post of Head Constable (Ministerial) before the respondent No. 5 for Hazaribagh Centre. It is a case of the petitioner that he qualified the written examination and after that he was called for Physical Test, Interview and also for Medical Examination at Training Centre & School, Border Security Force, Meru, Hazaribagh by the respondent No. 5 vide letter dated 24.11.2010. The petitioner appeared in all the test examinations and qualified all the examinations but in the Medical Examination he was found unfit. The reasons were duly assigned in the Medical Certificate, declaring the petitioner to be unfit. As per Rules, the petitioner preferred Review against the Medical Examination in which he was declared fit. The petitioner states that as per the standing rules, the petitioner preferred a review before Apex Medical Board and the said Board after examining the petitioner also declared him medically unfit. In view of the decisions of the Apex Medical Board, the case of the petitioner was not considered for appointment on the post of Head Constable though he had qualified all the other tests but medically declared unfit. Hence, the petitioner has challenged the Apex Medical Board report in the instant writ petition. 3. Mr. Ajay Kr. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner declared fit by different Medical Practitioners and he obtained those certificates he approached for review medical board but illegally and arbitrarily the Apex Medical Board declared him unfit. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner qualified all other tests and only in the medical examination he was declared unfit with mala fide intention. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner qualified all other tests and only in the medical examination he was declared unfit with mala fide intention. Learned counsel submits that he approached this Court because of the fact that he has been declared fit in all the other examinations. On the basis of said examination the petitioner should be allowed to join the post of Head Constable. 4. Per contra counter affidavit has been filed. Mr. Rajiv Sinha assisted by Mr. Niraj Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposes the contention of the petitioner and submits that it is very well settled that even if, a candidate has been declared fit in all the other examinations but in the medical examination he is found unfit then there cannot be any ground for appointment on the post of Head Constable or any other posts. There is no illegality committed by the respondents in declaring the petitioner medically unfit and unsuccessful, so the petitioner is not fit for appointment to the post of Head Constable. 5. Be that as it may, having gone through the rival submissions of the parties, this Court is of the considered view that no illegality has been committed by the respondent authorities as the petitioner has been declared unfit in medical examination by the Apex Medical Board. No interference is required in the writ petition. 6. Resultantly, the instant writ petition stands dismissed.