Vishal v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi High Court · 17 Dec 2025 · 2025:DHC:11567-DB
C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla
W.P.(C) 19150/2025
2025:DHC:11567-DB
administrative petition_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court allowed a writ petition directing a fresh medical examination by specialists for a candidate disqualified on medical grounds related to urinary tract infection sequelae.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(C) 19150/2025
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 19150/2025 & CM APPL. 79725/2025
VISHAL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Pankaj Mehta, Ms. Shweta Soni, Ms. Akansha Singh, Mr. Apaar Puri, Advs.
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sahaj Garg, SPC
WITH
Mr. Sanjay Pal, GP
Insp Athurv and Mr. Ramniwas Yadav CRPF
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)
17.12.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

1. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties and given the facts of the case, we are inclined to dispose of this writ petition without calling for a reply.

2. Mr. Garg, learned SPC for the respondents, has graciously agreed.

3. The issue is brief.

4. The petitioner has been disqualified for recruitment to the post of Constable/GD in the CAPF on the ground that he had hematuria and hydroureteronephrosis.

5. It is common knowledge that hematuria and hydroureteronephrosis are normal sequelae of urinary tract infection.

6. The petitioner underwent a Detailed Medical Examination on 1 December 2025 and Review Medical Examination on 2 December 2025.

7. A person who suffers from urinary tract infection cannot recover overnight.

8. Accordingly, given the special facts of this case and the nature of the ailment of the petitioner, we deem it appropriate in the interests of justice that the petitioner should be examined once more by a competent medical board which should include a urologist or a nephrologist.

9. Let the petitioner be examined on 27 December 2025 at 11 am.

10. In the meantime, Mr. Sahaj Garg learned SPC for the respondents, would inform of the place and time where the petitioner should present himself for being examined.

11. Ms. Shweta Soni, learned Counsel for the petitioner, undertakes on behalf of her client that she would abide by the outcome of the fresh examination.

12. The result of the examination would be made known to the petitioner as soon as it is undertaken.

13. The petition stands allowed to the aforesaid extent with no orders as to costs.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J. DECEMBER 17, 2025