Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010228322024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case : WP(C)/6456/2024 NAYAN JYOTI DAS S/O- NRIPEN DAS R/O- VILLAGE- JABERIKUCHI P.O- BARKOLA CHOWKA P.S- MANGALDAI DIST- DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784525 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI. PIN- 110001. 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CRPF (RECRUITMENT BRANCH) LEVEL-4 SECTOR 01 R.K PURAM NEW DELHI-66 (MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS) 3:THE PRESIDING OFFICER PST/PET BOARD CT/GD-2024 CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE GROUP CENTRE AMERIGOG Page No.# 2/6 GUWAHATI-23 ASSAM 4:MEDICAL OFFICER DME BOARD CT/GD-2024 CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE GROUP CENTRE AMERIGOG GUWAHATI-23 ASSAM 5:THE PRESIDING OFFICER RME BOARD CT/GD-2024 CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE GROUP CENTRE AMERIGOG GUWAHATI-23 ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. K PAUL Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 18.11.2025 Heard Mr. J P. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.S Roy, learned CGC for the respondents. 2. The petitioner, in response to the advertisement dated 24.11.2023 issued by the Staff Selection Commission, applied for the recruitment to the post of Constable (GD) in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), NIA, SSF, and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles Examination for the year 2024. The petitioner claims to belong to the SC category and assert eligibility for the post, thus Page No.# 3/6 participating in the recruitment process. The petitioner was declared successful in both the Computer Based Test as well as the Physical Standard Test (PST)/ Physical Efficiency Test (PET). However, during the subsequent Medical Examinations, i.e. Detailed Medical Examination, the petitioner was declared unfit on the grounds of “Vitilligo glance penis; pectus excavatum on chest and bow leg”. Thereafter, being dissatisfied with the opinion of the medical report, the petitioner examined himself before the Gauhati Medical College & Hospital for examination of Pectus Exacavatum. The concerned department of the Gauhati Medical College & Hospital after examining the petitioner issued a certificate/report dated 25.10.2024 wherein it is opined that there is no evidence of obvious pectus exacavatum. The petitioner submitted the said report before the respondent authorities but the respondent authorities did not entertained. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner appeared before the Review Medical Examination Board, the petitioner was also declared unfit for “Vitiligo and Pectus Excavatum”. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that thereafter again on 18.11.2024, the petitioner examined himself before the Gauhati Medical College & Hospital for examining Vitiligo over glans and Chest. After examining the petitioner, the Dermatology & STD department of the Gauhati Medical College & Hospital opined that it does not hamper his day to day activities and does not made him unfit for job. Moreover, the Pulmonary Medicine Department, Gauhati Medical College & Hospital issued another certificate dated 18.11.2024 where it is opined that the petitioner is found to be fit from pulmonary medicine side and no Pectus Excavatum noted on physical and radiological examination. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that apart from the aforesaid medical examination, pm 19.11.2024, CT Scan of the Thorax (Plain) on the petitioner was done at RDC, Mangaldoi where Page No.# 4/6 it is opined that no obvious abnormality noted n Plain CT study of thorax. 3. In the light of these contrary medical opinions—the petitioner has approached this Court, praying for an appropriate direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to participate in the recruitment process in pursuance of the advertisement dated 24.11.2023. 4. The respondents have contested the matter by filing their affidavits. The learned CGC for the respondents has relied upon the Revised guidelines for Recruitment Medical Examination in Central Armed Forces and Assam Rifles to show that as per Paragraph XIII sub-paragraph c at page 34 of the Guidelines, the petitioner was declared unfit for Vitiligo (in penis) and as per Paragraph 6 Sub-para 12 at page 07 of the Guidelines, the petitioner was declared unfit for Pectus Excavatum with Haller index of 2.6. The learned CGC submits that as per guidelines issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the present system in which only one Review Medical Examination is allowed and there is no appeal against the decision of the Review Medical Board. The learned CGC respondents has placed reliance on an order of the Apex Court passed in SLP(C) Nos. 738- 741/2022, where the SLP preferred by the Union although dismissed, it was observed that as a normal rule the decision taken by the Review Medical Board should be treated as final. 5. The learned counsel for the parties have been heard and pleadings available on the record have been carefully perused. The amended guidelines for the Review Medical Examination in Central Armed Police Forces and Assam Rifles are enclosed to the affidavit filed by the respondents. 6. Upon perusal of the writ petition and after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is seen that the petitioner is before this Court challenging the Page No.# 5/6 rejection of his application on the grounds of being found disqualified by the CRPF Authorities. The petitioner’s prayer before this Court is to allow the petitioner to participate in the recruitment process in pursuance of the advertisement dated 24.11.2023, in light of the opinion rendered by the Gauhati Medical College & Hospital. The opinion indicates that the petitioner is fit from Pulmonary Medicine side and no pectus excavatum noted on physical and radiological examination. 7. Reference is also made to the guidelines for the Review Medical Examination, which lay down certain conditions for the process. These guidelines specify that, ordinarily, there is no right of appeal against the findings of the recruiting Medical Officer or the initial Medical Board. However, if the government is satisfied with the evidence placed before them by the candidate, indicating the possibility of an error in judgment by the recruiting Medical Officer or the initial Medical Board, they may allow re-examination by the Review Medical Board. The guidelines also prescribe in detail the manner in which the medical evidence relied upon by the candidate should be presented before the Competent Authority when seeking reconsideration. 8. The facts of the present case reveal that there are contradictory medical opinions. On one hand, the Detailed Medical Board and Review Medical Board rejected the petitioner on the grounds of “Vitilligo glance penis; pectus excavatum on chest and bow leg” and “Vitiligo and Pectus Excavatum” respectively while on the other hand, after presenting him before the Gauhati Medical College & Hospital, the doctor of the college opined that no pectus excavatum noted on physical and radiological examination and the Doctor of Dermatology & STD Department of the Gauhati Medical College & Hospital opined that it does not hamper his day to day activities and does not made him Page No.# 6/6 unfit for job . Under these circumstances, the issue becomes a disputed question of fact, which a Writ Court ordinarily would not delve into. 9. Under these circumstances, this Court considers it appropriate to mould the relief prayed for by the petitioner and permit the petitioner to approach the Competent Authorities of the respondent within 2 (two) weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. The petitioner may file an application, duly supported by all relevant medical documents, including reports of tests, if any, undertaken/undergone by the petitioner before the Gauhati Medical College. If the relevant medical documents are submitted along with the representation, the respondent authorities will take note of such medical opinion. If this opinion is found to be based on proper tests and examinations conducted by the medical authorities of Gauhati Medical College & Hospital, the respondent authorities will reconstitute a Review Medical Board for the re- examination of the petitioner. If, in the opinion of the respondent authorities, civilian specialists from the concerned departments are necessary, he may also be included in the Review Medical Board. 10. If the representation, as directed above, is filed by the writ petitioner, then the directions contained in this order shall be carried out within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. The representation must be filed in the prescribed format, in accordance with the revised uniform guidelines for Review Medical Examination in CRPF and Assam Rifles and must also include a certified copy of the order of this Court. 11. Writ petition accordingly stands disposed of in terms of the above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant