ANKUR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1. The present petition has been file d b> the petitioner praying interalia for quashing the letter dated 16v07j20:|5^ whereunder he has: been declared unfit for appointment to the post ofa=Goh^table/Driver withthe CISF on the ground that he is suffering from haemorrhoids,

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the-case are that in the month of March, 2015, the petitioner had applied to the respondents for the post of a Constable/Driver. He had qualified the physical fitness test and the driving test and was called for his medical examination. The medical examinafibn of the petitioner was conducted on 20.4.2015 at the CISF NHCC Hospital, Saket, where he was declared medically unfit on account of suffering from external haemorrhoids. Immediately thereafter, the petifioner had approached the Head of the Surgery Department at Babu Jagjivan 'Ram W.P.(C) 9611/2015 • ' Page I of[3] 2016:DHC:8998-DB Hospitalj Jahangirpuri, New Delhi, for a medical examination. Upon his medical examination, the said Hospital had issued a Medical Fitness Certificate dated 29.04.2015, wherein it was opined that the petitioner had been operated for external haemorrhoids at 9'o clock position and was declared fit for normal duty.

3. Armed with the aforesaid opinion, the petitioner had again approached the respondents on 30.04.2015 and handed over the Medical Certificate dated 29.04.2015. On receiving the said document, the respondents had called upon the petitioner to submit an appeal against the medical unfitness, which was duly submitted by him. Vide letter dated 14.07.2015, the petitioner was referred to a Surgical Specialist at Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi for an opinion.

4. Thepetitioner reported at Safdarjung^ on 15.07.2015. Asper the report of the said Hospital, the;p^titi6ner had haemorrhoids at 9'o clock position. The petitioner again presented.himselfbefore the Review Medical Board on 16.07.2015. The Board examined^ the report forwarded by Safdarjung Hospital and physically examined the^petitioner and yet again declared him unfit on the grounli^iifrom haemorrhoids at 9'0 clock position.

5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that immediately thereafter, the petitioner had gone back to Babu Jagjivan Ram Hospital, Delhi where he had undergone surgery forhaemorrhoids andsought a fresh examination and the concerned specialist had opined that he was not suffering from haemorrhoids. Based on the aforesaid opinion dated 17.07.2015, the petitioner has filed the present petition praying inter alia that the respondents be directed to obtain yet another medical opinion and the W.P.(C) 9611/2015 Page[2] of[3] Medical Board may be reconstituted to examine his fitness.

6. Learned counsel for the respondents states that medical opinion is that even after surgical removal, haemorrhoids can recur, which is why under the Guidelines of Recruitment Medical Examination in Central Armed Police Forces and Assam Rifles updated as on May, 2015, issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs (Police Division-II), Government of India, it has been recommended that cases of haemorrhoids should be rejected in terms of clause XIII (f)(iii). He hands over the Guidelines which have been perused by us.

7. In view of the aforesaid Guidelines, we are of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by directing: the respondents to refer the petitioner to another specialist for obtaining medical opinion or for reconstituting the Medical Board. The Guidelines mentioned above clearly prescribe that a candidate suffering from haemorrhoids ought to be rejected. Further, given the fact that the -petitioner is suffering from haemorrhoids, though presently treated, and reeurrencie.of the;:sai cannot be ruled out, we are not inclined- to, enter^in;-tifte -pi^efitr^tition, which is accordingly dismissed, while leayinglKe p|lSiest[6].bear their own costs. HIMA KOHLI, J SUNIL GAUR, J MARCH 02, 2016 rkb/mk/sk