Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 24th March, 2023
NITESH YADAV ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sachin Chauhan and Mr. Rajesh Chauhan, Advocates
Through: Mr. Krishna Kumar Sharma, Senior Panel Counsel with Mr. Anil Devlal, GP and Mr. Hemendra Singh, DC
(Law), BSF
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
JUDGMENT
1. In view reasons stated in the present application, delay of 62 days in re-filing the present petition is condoned.
2. Application stands disposed of. CM APPL. 6574/2023 (for exemption)
3. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
4. Application stands disposed of.
REVIEW PET. 43/2023
5. Vide the present review petition, petitioner is seeking review and 12:19 setting aside of order dated 18.10.2022 passed by this Court.
6. Brief facts of present case are that petitioner applied for the post in question in pursuance of selection process initiated by SSC regarding Delhi Police, CAPFs and ASI in CISF Examination, 2020 under ‘OBC’ Category. Petitioner appeared in and cleared Paper-I. Thereafter, petitioner was shortlisted for appearing in Physical Standard Test & Physical Endurance Test and he qualified both tests. Thereafter, petitioner was called for Detailed Medical Examination to be held on 22.04.2022, however, vide the Medical Report dated 22.04.2022 and Review Medical report dated 23.04.2022, the petitioner was declared ‘unfit’ on the ground of ‘left eyeconvergent squint’ and ‘squint’, respectively. Thereafter, the petitioner got himself examined at Dr. Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, AIIMS wherein vide report dated 27.06.2022, it was stated that he had ‘No squint’. The petitioner then made a representation dated 01.07.2020 to the respondents, however, the same was not decided by the respondents. Thereafter, the petitioner approached this Court vide present petition, i.e. W.P.(C) 13352/2022. This Court relying upon the order dated 04.06.2021 passed in W.P(C) 5847/2021 titled as Ashish Kumar Pandey Vs. Union of India & Ors and dismissed the present writ petition vide order dated 18.10.2022.
7. Notice issued.
8. Learned counsel for respondents accepts notice.
9. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
10. This Court, in similar situation and in similar petitions, had directed RR Hospital to constitute a Medical Board and examine the petitioners therein. 12:19
11. Accordingly, since there are two different medical opinions in the present case, therefore, without going into the controversy, we hereby set aside order dated 18.10.2022 passed by this Court and dispose of the present review petition by directing the RR Hospital to constitute a Medical Board and assess the petitioner’s eyes within four weeks. The respondents shall facilitate the petitioner to get medically examined.
12. As agreed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the report of the RR Hospital shall be final and binding.
13. We hereby make it clear that in case the petitioner found medically fit, petitioner shall be allowed to join further selection process. If the vacancies in question of the year 2020 have already filled-up, the respondents shall borrow one vacancy from subsequent year. Petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits except back wages. (SURESH KUMAR KAIT) JUDGE (SAURABH BANERJEE)
JUDGE MARCH 24, 2023 12:19