Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 3 (ALL)

Ritesh Kumar Pandey v. Union of India

2017-01-02

DILIP B.BHOSALE, SUNEET KUMAR

body2017
JUDGMENT Heard Mr. Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Patanjali Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents. The appellant, who is the original petitioner, challenges the following order dated 21.11.2016, whereby his writ petition has been dismissed: "The petitioner has been declared unfit by the Medical Board and the Review Medical Board. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking mandamus commanding respondent to declare him as fit candidate for recruitment of Constable (Technical and Tradesmen), 2015 on the basis of a medical examination conducted by Private Medical Practitioner which is appended as Annexure No. 5 to the writ petition. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Union of India through Ministry of Railways v. Parul Punia being Special Appeal No.968 of 2015, decided on 11.1.2016 has observed as follows: - "...In a number of such cases, candidates who have been invalidated on medical grounds produce expert opinions of their own to cast doubt on the credibility of the official medical report constituted by the recruiting body. In such cases, the Court may not have any means of verifying the actual identity of the person who was examined in the course of the medical examination by the Doctor whose report is relied upon by the candidate. Hence, even though the authority whose medical report was produced by the candidate may be an expert, the basic issue as to whether the identity of the candidate who was examined, matches the identity of the person who has applied for the post is a serious issue which cannot be ignored..." In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed." It is not in dispute that the appellant was examined by the Medical Board and against its decision, he preferred an appeal before Review Medical Board, which also confirmed the findings recorded by the Medical Board. We have perused the result of the review medical examination dated 25.10.2016. It appears that the appellant has been declared medically unfit on account of some problem with his vision. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by learned Single Judge or even by the Medical Board. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.