Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:12215] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14603/2015 Gokul Chand Yadav S/o Shri Kalu Ram Yadav, Category - Obc, Village And Post Vishangarh Baya Manoharpur Tehsil Sahapura District Jaipur Raj. ----Petitioner Versus
1. Union Of India Through The Secretary Home Department Government Of India, Secretariat New Delhi India
2. Group Commandant Central Industrial Security Force Cisf, Head -Quarter -New Delhi India
3. Director General Of Police Central Industrial Security Force Cisf, Head -Quarter -New Delhi India ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.B. Sharma Ganthola, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anshu Kanwar, Adv.for Ms. Nidhi Khandelwal, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Judgment 18/03/2025
1.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in pursuance to the advertisement dated 16.09.2014, the petitioner had applied for the post of Constable/Tradesman in CISF. It is further submitted that for the purpose of selection, the petitioner appeared before the recruitment board, scheduled on 16.02.2015 at CISF unit Bhel, Jhansi. Further it is submitted that the petitioner participated in the Physical Efficiency test, Skill test and Written examination conducted on 29.06.2015 at Saket, New Delhi.
[2025:RJ-JP:12215] (2 of 3) [CW-14603/2015]
2. Additionally, it is submitted that medical board and review medical board declared the petitioner unfit for the said post on account of a tattoo, carrying angle (hand) less than the required parameters and on account of high arched feet. However, the petitioner being aggrieved of the same preferred an appeal for Review Medical Examination, resultant to which the petitioners’ review medical examination was conducted on 20.08.2015 at NHCC Hospital, Saket by board consisting of three Medical officers. Howsoever, the petitioner was declared unfit by the said review medical board on account of not carrying requisite angle qua right hand.
3. Thereafter, the petitioner was referred to Safdarjung Hospital in order to seek opinion of a specialist, whereby, part deficiencies of the petitioner were ruled out. Moreover, an opinion from one of the Government hospital was also sought, whereby, petitioner was declared fit and no abnormalities were found.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that as on date, no seats are lying vacant qua the said post and fresh selection process has also carried out. It is further submitted that in the matter in hand, no interim order is operational qua the petitioner.
5. Heard and considered the rival arguments advanced by the
learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. Taking note of the over-all facts and circumstances of the case, this Court has made the following observations:- 5.1 That the instant matter pertains to the Year 2015. 5.2 That Clause-7 of the guidelines governing the present impugned selection process i.e. Uniform Guidelines for Medical
[2025:RJ-JP:12215] (3 of 3) [CW-14603/2015] Examination Test (MET) for recruitment in CAPFs, NSG & AR clearly specifies the requisite mandates that the recruiting agency shall be cautious for instance any limitation of joint movements and carrying angle. 5.3 That the medical board constituted by respondents is a special board and same cannot be compared to any private hospital, as medical standards adopted and requirements of the military are distinct and unique in compassion to other fields. 5.4 That no seats are lying vacant qua the said post as on date and fresh recruitment have also culminated. Nevertheless, in absence of any interim protection, the prayer made in the petition cannot be considered in the present scenario.
6. In support of the aforementioned reliance can be placed upon the dictum encapsulated in State of Orrisa & Anr. v. Raj Kishor Nanda & Ors., reported in (2010) 6 SCC 777 and Raj Rishi Mehra and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr. reported in (2013) 12 SCC 243.
7. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(SAMEER JAIN),J CHANDAN /121