SSB Recruitment | Judicial Review Of Medical Board's Opinion Limited, Doesn't Involve Recognition Of Candidate's Right To Undergo Operation: Allahabad HC
The Allahabad High Court has held that the scope of judicial review in rejection of a candidature based on medical condition found during medical examination is limited. The Court held that unless the medical board or the department has violated any guidelines issued for conduction the examination, interference by Court is not justified.The bench comprising of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra...
The Allahabad High Court has held that the scope of judicial review in rejection of a candidature based on medical condition found during medical examination is limited. The Court held that unless the medical board or the department has violated any guidelines issued for conduction the examination, interference by Court is not justified.
The bench comprising of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi held,
“The limited issue which has to be examined by the medical board is as to whether on the date of medical examination the candidate was medically fit or unfit. Whether the candidate was accorded consideration in terms of the policy/rules for medical examination would be the issue. It is only the correctness of such opinion by the medical board which can be examined in the review medical board. Judicial review of such administrative action would not involve recognition of a right in a candidate to get himself operated upon, even after he has been validly found unfit on a particular medical exigency so as to get himself operated and thereafter apply for fresh consideration of his candidature.”
Appellants applied for the post of Constable Driver in the Central Police Organization-SSB. Upon medical examination as per recruitment Rules, the appellants were found suffering from small hydrocele and were non-suited. Against their rejection, appellants filed a writ petition.
The Single Judge held that the medical examination conducted was in accordance with the procedure laid down for recruitment. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed. Appellants filed a special appeal against the order of the Single Judge on grounds that in case of a small hydrocele, candidate can be selected if he has been operated upon and there is no bad scar remaining.
It was argued that the appellants ought to have been given an opportunity to get operated upon and subsequently their candidature could be considered afresh.
The Court observed that the manner in which medical examination is conducted has been specified in guidelines issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India.
The Court observed that the Clause 25 providing that if small hydrocele has been operated upon and no bad scar is left would mean that such operation must be undergone prior to medical examination.
“Clause 25 cannot be construed as giving an opportunity to the candidate after his rejection on medical ground to avail the remedy of operation and, thereafter claim a right of fresh consideration by the medical board. In the event such contention is accepted, every candidate who is found suffering with small hydrocele will be conceded a right to get himself operated and thereafter appear afresh, for medical examination. That does not appear to be the intent of the guidelines.”
The Court held that the Court can only look at whether the procedure laid down in the guidelines for medical examination was followed or not. Once the procedure has been duly followed, the Court cannot interfere in the selection process.
Upholding the order of Single Judge, the Court held that it is open for the appellants to get operated upon for small hydrocele and then apply afresh.
Case Title: Rajesh Kumar And Another vs. Union Of India And 3 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 173 [SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 214 of 2024]
Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 173