Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1056 (KER)

Moses S, S/o. Sudeesh P. v. Union of India

2025-04-11

AMIT RAWAL, K.V.JAYAKUMAR

body2025
JUDGMENT : K. V. JAYAKUMAR, J. Impugning the judgment of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C). No.12014 of 2025 dated 03.04.2025, the appellant/writ petitioner preferred this writ appeal. 2. Succinctly, the facts in brief are as follows: 3. The appellant/writ petitioner Shri. Moses S., had participated in the selection process for the post of Airmen in the Indian Air Force Group ‘Y’ Medical Assistant trade. The appellant qualified in the physical test and written examination. The appellant appeared for medical examination on 07.02.2025 at Air Force Hospital Coimbatore, wherein he was declared as medically unfit by the Medical Board. 4. The appellant, Shri. Moses, preferred an appeal against the findings of the Medical Board. The Appellate Medical Board re-examined the appellant/writ petitioner on 05.03.2025 at SMC, HQ TC Bangalore, and also found that the appellant/writ petitioner is unfit for appointment in the Air Force as Airmen. Both the original authority and the Appellate Board had noticed the ‘ECG abnormality – Left Axis Deviation’. 5. The contention of the respondents was that, since the appellant was found to be medically unfit by the Medical Board and the Appellate Board, he is not eligible to be appointed to the post of Airmen in the Indian Air Force. 6. The main contention of the appellant was that, the appellant consulted the cardiologist at Neyyar Medicity, Kattakkada and also Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute of Medical Sciences and Technology, Trivandrum. But both the hospitals do not find any abnormality in the ECG of the appellant/writ petitioner. The appellant has placed reliance on Exhibit-P5 report of Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute of Medical Sciences and Technology, Trivandrum. The learned Single Judge, noticing the rival submissions of the counsel for the parties, dismissed the writ petition, holding that the recruitment process does not contemplate or provides for medical examination of the candidates outside the Primary Medical Board and Appellate Medical Boards constituted in Army/Air Force hospitals. 7. Sri. C. Dinesh, the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India in-charge, submitted that the impugned judgment is legal and sustainable in law. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner Sri. Ratheesh B., submitted that the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge is patently illegal. 7. Sri. C. Dinesh, the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India in-charge, submitted that the impugned judgment is legal and sustainable in law. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner Sri. Ratheesh B., submitted that the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge is patently illegal. It was also submitted that the finding of the learned Single Judge that there is no provision for a Review Medical Board once the Appellate Medical Board finds a candidate unsuitable for the job is incorrect. Learned Single Judge discarded Exhibit-P5 and Exhibit-P6 test results of Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute of Medical Sciences and Technology, Trivandrum. The appellant/writ petitioner declared to be unfit after a partial evaluation. 8. We have heard the rival submission of the counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book. 9. Sri. C. Dinesh, the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India in-charge, submitted that there is no provision for review with regard to the appointments in Indian Air Force, even though there is a provision to that effect in the Indian Army. 10. Sri. Ratheesh B., submitted that the petitioner, Shri. Moses, is a young man aged 19 years, who is an aspirant of employment in the Indian Armed Forces at the Union of India. The apprehension of the appellant is that the rest results during the selection process would adversely affect his career prospects in future. 11. The learned Single Judge noticing the rival submissions of the counsel for the parties, dismissed the writ petition. The relevant portion of the judgment is extracted hereunder: “5. I have considered the submissions. This Court cannot substitute and laid down a different procedure for the selection and appointment of the persons in the Air Force. As per the laid down procedure, there is no provision for a Review Medical Board, once the Appellate Medical Board finds a candidate unsuitable for the job. The Army and Air Force have different procedures and different requirements of the personnel serving therein. If the Army has a provision for the Review Medical Board, that will not entitle the petitioner to the Review Medical Board examination if there is no such provision existing in the recruitment process for the Airmen in the Air Force. 6. The Army and Air Force have different procedures and different requirements of the personnel serving therein. If the Army has a provision for the Review Medical Board, that will not entitle the petitioner to the Review Medical Board examination if there is no such provision existing in the recruitment process for the Airmen in the Air Force. 6. The petitioner's medical certificate obtained from private hospital and Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute of Medical Sciences & Technology, Trivandrum, are of no use inasmuch the recruitment process does not contemplate and provides for medical examination of candidates outside the Primary Medical Board and Appellate Medical Boards constituted in Army/Air Force hospitals. 7. In view thereof, this Court cannot substitute the findings of the Primary Medical Board and Appellate Medical Board regarding the petitioner's medical fitness for appointment as Airmen, and once the medical experts have found the petitioner unfit, there is no occasion for this Court for direction to re-examine the petitioner for which there does not exist provision.” 12. Upon hearing the submissions of the counsel for the parties, we do not find any illegality, perversity, much less fallacy in the judgment of the learned Single Bench. However, it is made clear that the test results arrived in the selection process by the Medical Board and the Appellate Board will not be a bar for the appellant/writ petitioner if he subsequently participates in some other selection processes. The writ appeal is disposed of with the above observations.