Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19928 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19388 of 2024 Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar Sharma Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kranti Kiran Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Chandrika Prasad Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Chandrika Prasad, learned counsel for respondents. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court questioning the decision of the Medical Board whereby the petitioner has been declared unfit for left ear tympanic membrane perforation, hemorrhoids, cubitus valgus deformity and carrying angle Rt. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner's left ear tympanic membrane perforation, hemorrhoids, cubitus valgus deformity and carrying angle Rt is normal as he got examined himself privately at Hospital where it has been found normal though he has been rejected. 4. Per contra it is argued by Sri Chandrika Prasad, learned counsel for respondents that opinion of Medical Board duly constituted by the respondent- recruitment authority cannot be judicial reviewed by this Court in exercise of superintendence power under Article 226 of the Constitution. 5. Sri Sri Chandrika Prasad, learned counsel for respondents has relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of Ankit Kumar v. State of U.P. and others passed in Writ - A No.- 5668 of 2021 decided on 3rd August, 2021 in which relying upon paragraph 6 of the decision of the Division Bench in the case Union of India v. Parul Punia: 2016 (2) ADJ 14 which reproduced hereunder: "6. Against the report of the Medical Board, the petitioner submitted a representation for a re-medical examination. The petitioner presented himself for a re-medical examination in which he was again found unfit due to dysfunctional ears. After the result of the re-medical examination, the petitioner got his ears checked by one Dr. Ashwani Kumar ENT Specialist, and according to his report dated 21.03.2021, the ears of the petitioner are fine, copy of the said report is annexed as Annexure 9 to the writ petition." The Court vide paragraph 33 has held that "the opinion of the Medical Board or Review Medical Board is erroneous or capricious or vague and smacks of malafide, the Court should refrain from interfering with the opinion of Medical Board and Review Medical Board which is a body constituted of experts to assess the fitness of candidate as per the norms and standards prescribed in respect of fitness of a candidate who is supposed to work in the police force". 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the aforesaid judgments. 7. In view of the above, in the absence of any pleadings of mala fides a whims that can be attributable to the Medical Board in rendering its opinion, this Court does not find any good ground to interfere in the matter to direct for fresh medical fitness test of the petitioner in super-session to the medical fitness opinion already expressed by a duly constituted medical board, dated 25.10.2024. 8. Petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 11.2.2025 Amit Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad