Yogesh Natwariya v. Union of India

1. Petitioner impugns the Review Medical Examination Report dated 26.07.2023 whereby petitioner has been declared medically unfit on the ground of recovery of anti-hypertensive medicines from his bag.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no finding as to whether the petitioner suffers from hypertension which was transient in nature due to excitement, etc. or whether it is due to any organic disease. She further submits that petitioner had not taken those medicines and W.P.(C) 10527/2023 2 clinically could have tested whether his blood pressure was normal because of effect of the medicines or otherwise.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent concedes that there is no opinion rendered by the Medical Board as to whether the petitioner suffers from hypertension or as to whether the rise in blood pressure, if any, was transient in nature or whether it was due to organic disease.

4. Reference may be had to the guidelines prescribed for the Review Medical Board which, inter-alia, reads as under: “(e) For candidates who have been rejected on the ground of hypertension/tachycardia should have been admitted/hospitalized by the Board before giving their final opinion regarding the candidate’s fitness or otherwise. The hospitalization report should indicate whether the rise in blood pressure is of transient in nature due to excitement etc. or whether it is due to any organic disease. In all such cases X- Ray and electrocardiographic examinations of heart and blood examinations like cholesterol/lipid profile, S. Creatinine etc. tests should also be carried out.

5. It is not in dispute that petitioner had been declared “unfit” on the ground of hypertension. It is also not in dispute that the Medical Board has not applied the guideline (e) extracted hereinabove in as much as the Medical Board, as per the guidelines, should have also ascertained as to whether the rise in blood pressure was transient in nature due to excitement, etc. or whether it was due to an organic disease, as required by the guidelines.

6. Since the guidelines have clearly not been followed, the opinion W.P.(C) 10527/2023 3 rendered by the Review Medical Board cannot be accepted. Accordingly, the findings of the Review Medical Board are set aside. The respondents are directed to constitute a fresh Review Medical Board which shall examine the petitioner, inter-alia, in accordance with the guidelines dated 31.05.2021.

7. The Review Medical Board be constituted within a period of two weeks from today with at least four days’ advance notice to the petitioner.

8. The petition is allowed and disposed of in the above terms.

9. It would be open to the petitioner to avail of any further remedies, if aggrieved by any such further decision of the Review Medical Board.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J MANOJ JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 5, 2023 ‘rs’