ANTARYAMI MISHRA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS
WRIA/9584/2025 · 2025-10-10
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 198415 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 198415 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 9584 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State counsel for opposite parties. 2. Petition has been filed seeking a direction to concerned authority to permit petitioner to join the joint training course for the post of Constable in Civil Police in pursuant to his selection. Prayer has also been made challenging rejection of petitioner's candidature on the basis of Medical report dated 17.05.2025. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that earlier petitioner had applied for recruitment on the post of Constable in the Civil Police and had cleared the written examination but was thereafter declared ineligible by means of medical report dated 17.05.2025 indicating a medical condition pertaining to petitioner's ear drum in the right ear. 4. It is submitted that the aforesaid disability being curable in nature, petitioner underwent a surgery on 11.07.2025 and a certificate to that effect has been issued by the attending Doctor on 09.08.2025 whereafter petitioner was examined by the District Hospital Sitapur which in its report dated 01.09.2025 has clearly indicated that bilateral hearing sensitivity is within normal limit. 5. In view of aforesaid, it is submitted that petitioner's disability was curable in nature and has in fact been cured by surgery due to which now Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vijyant Nigam, Ashish Kumar Dixit Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Antaryami Mishra .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
there is no impediment in petitioner's appointment on the post of Constable in Civil Police. 6. Learned State counsel has been provided written instructions dated 04.09.2025, a copy of which is taken on record and does not advert to the aforesaid aspects. 7. Considering the fact that petitioner's rejection was on the ground of medical disability which appears to have been cured subsequently surgically and such an aspect is required to be considered by experts only, the opposite parties no.3 and 4 are directed to constitute a Medical Board for reconsideration of petitioner's case in the light of surgery effected upon him and the report of District Hospital, Sitapur. 8. Such a Medical Board shall be constituted within a period of ten days' from the date a certified copy of this order is served upon concerned authority.
The Medical Board thereafter shall consider petitioner's case and make its recommendations within a period of two weeks' from said constitution. 9. Appropriate directions in pursuance of report submitted by Medical Board shall be taken by the competent authority within a period of two weeks thereafter. 10. With the aforesaid directions, petition stands disposed of. October 10, 2025 Subodh/- WRIA No. 9584 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench