Page No.# 1/8 GAHC010239372024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) : WP(C)/6099/2024 RAMKRITI CHAUHAN SON OF SRI MAYARAM CHOUHAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- LENGERIBORI PO- LENGERIBORI PS- BHURAGAON DIST.- MORIGAON ASSAM. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS DEPARTMENT OF PERSONAL AND TRAINING STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION BLOCK NO. 12 CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI- 110003. 2:STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION HOUSEFED COMPLEX LAST GATE- BASISTHA ROAD P.O.- ASSAM SACHIVALAYA DISPUR Page No.# 2/8 GUWAHATI- 781006 KAMRUP(M) ASSAM. 3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CRPF (RECRUITMENT BRANCH) EAST BLOCK- 07 LEVEL-4 SECTOR-01 R.K. PURAM NEW DELHI- 110066. 4:THE REVIEW MEDICAL BOARD AT/GD-2924 GROUP CENTRE CRPF GUWAHATI DIST.- KAMRUP(M) ASSAM. 5:THE REGISTRAR OF MEDICINE GAUHATI MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL GUWAHATI- 32 DIST.- KAMRUP(M) ASSAM. ------------ Advocate for : MR. R BORA Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 16.10.2025 Heard Mr. R. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. S. Baruah, learned CGC for the respondents. 2. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner who had offered his candidature Page No.# 3/8 in response to the advertisement dated 24.11.2023 for selection and appointment to the post of Constable (General Duty) in the Central Armed Police Force, SSF and Riflemen (General Duty) in Assam Rifles Examination, 2024. The petitioner qualified in the written test in the Physical Standard Test/Physical Efficiency Test (PST/PET). The petitioner got qualified marks in all the categories. Thereafter, upon medical examination the petitioner was found to be unfit. He was presented before the Review Medical examination which was held on 14.10.2024 and the findings of the Review Medical Board was declared on 17.10.2024, whereby the petitioner was declared to be unfit on account of Diastolic Hypertension, Trivial Regurgitation and Pulmonary Artery. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these findings arrived at by the Review Medical Board are contrary to the finding given by the Department of Cardiology, Gauhati Medical College & Hospital (GMCH), Guwahati. Thereafter, the petitioner got medically examined before the GMCH and he was found to be clinically fit after the physical examination. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent authorities had themselves referred the petitioner to GMCH and the finding declaring the petitioner clinically fit was issued on 17.10.2024. It is submitted that this finding was not considered by the Authorities during the Review Medical examination which was also held on 17.10.2024. Page No.# 4/8 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also referred to the Office Memorandum dated 31.05.2021 wherein the guidelines for Review Medical examination/Review Medical Board were laid down. Referring to the said guidelines, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proper procedure by which the evaluation of the candidate is required to be made has been elaborately mentioned in the guidelines. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner be directed to re-examaine before the Medical Authorities of the respondents by taking into consideration the opinion rendering by the Civil Medical practitioners and the procedure laid down in the Office Memorandum dated 31.05.2021. 4. Ms. S. Baruah, leaned CGC, on the other hand, disputes the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted that the affidavit has been filed in the matter and there is no violation of the guidelines given in the Office Memorandum dated 31.05.2021. It is submitted that the Apex Court vide order dated 20.10.2023 passed in SLP (C) Nos. 738-741 of 2022 titled Union of India & Ors. vs. Koushik Paul held that ordinarily the findings of the Review Medical Board must be treated to be filed. 5. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the pleadings available on record have been carefully perused. It is seen that the Office Page No.# 5/8 Memorandum dated 31.05.2021 lays down the guidelines for review medical examination. The same is extracted below: GUIDELINES FOR REVIEW MEDICAL EXAMINATION (RME) IN CENTRAL ARMED POLICE FORCES & ASSAM RIFLES As per laid down guidelines, optimum care should be taken in selection of candidates as a large number of candidates are available for selection. Every candidates must be medically fit to carry out tough duties of the Force. The discharge of the candidate on medical grounds within a few months of his/her enlistment results in loss of precious time in making selection as well as loss to the government's exchequer. 2. All candidates declared unfit during Detailed Medical Examination (DME) will be allowed to undergo Review Medical Examination (RME), provided they give their written consent by appending their signature on the intimation indicating the reasons for being unfit, as per Annexure-A-1. 3. Henceforth, RME of candidates will be conducted in continuation of DME preferably on the next day of DME. 4. The consent for RME as per Annexure-(A-1) duly signed by the candidate should be submitted within 24 hours after he/she is informed of his/her unfitness in DME. 5. Nodal Force for recruitment will endeavor to keep the venue for DME/RME in the vicinity of a Composite Hospital of CAPFS or Government Medical College/Hospitals, for facilitating specialist opinion/investigations etc, if required. 6. Guidelines for Review Medical Boards:- (a) Review Medical Board shall examine the candidate specifically for the deficiency for which the candidate has been declared unfit. [Also, the medical term used as cause of unfitness during the Initial Medical Examination may differ from that arrived at by the Review Medical Board]. (b) It will be ensured that the Medical Officer who has conducted DME of a candidate is not part of the RME Board for the same candidate. (c) The defect for which candidate has been declared unfit should be examined thoroughly and the findings must be supported by proper investigation reports, if applicable. (d) Review Medical Board may obtain opinion of concerned specialists or super specialists of Govt. Medical College and Hospital in case of any doubt. Therefore, in cases of rejection in review medical examination, clinical findings should be corroborated with confirmatory tests/investigations/opinion of specialists/ super specialists of Govt. Hospitals/Medical Colleges/Govt. approved private medical centers, whichever and wherever applicable. 7. Following examples are cited for the guidance of Review Medical Board:- a) In any cardiac case like valvular defects, ECG/Echocardiogram must be carried out. b) In cases of suspected lesions of chest like Hilar lymphadenitis, calcifled spots, Koch's infiltrations, any mass detected in X-Ray chest etc CT Chest should be carried out. c) For vascular defects like Varicose vein, vascular malformations etc, Colour Doppler should be carried out. Page No.# 6/8 d) To rule out any eye surgery like Lasik/ LASEK / PRK / PK/Glaucoma/ Squint/Pterygium Surgery etc. investigations may be carried out accordingly, viz. slit lamp examination /ophthalmoscopy /Corneal Topography/ OCT/ HVF/ Tonometry/VEP/ ERG / Synoptophore etc. should be carried out. e) For candidates who have been rejected on the ground of hypertension/tachycardia should be admitted/ hospitalized by the Board before giving their final opinion regarding the candidate's fitness or otherwise. The hospitalization report should indicate whether the rise in blood pressure is of transient nature due to excitement etc. or whether it is due to any organic disease. In all such cases X- Ray and electrocardiographic examinations of heart and blood examinations like cholesterol/lipid profile, S. Creatinine etc, tests should also be carried out. f) For any suspected case of CAD, TMT test should be conducted. g) Any tremor in hands or other parts of body thyrotoxicosis should be ruled out and neurologist's opinion should be taken. h) For suspected Diabetes Mellitus cases GTT and Glycosylated Hb. test should be carried out. i) For Knock knee, bow leg, cubitus valgus and varus deformities, X-Ray plate with findings should be attached. j) For any type of deafness, audiometry should be carried out. k) For a case of dental points less than 14, OPG should be carried out. 6. The guidelines for Review Medical Board prescribed at Clause-7(e) clearly lays down for hypertention/tachycardia, the candidate should be hospitalized by the Board and the hospitalization report should indicate whether the rise the blood pressure is of transient nature due to excitement etc or due to any organic disease. In all such cases X-Ray and Electrocardiographic (ECG) examination of heart and blood examinations should be undertaken. 7. It is submitted by the learned CGC that the medical report of the writ petitioner in respect of the medical examination undertaken by the respondent authorities is available. Electrocardiographic report is available and placed before the Court. 8. The affidavit and also medical report of the Medical Review Board, Page No.# 7/8 however, does not reflect as to why the opinion given by the Civil Medical Practitioner, namely, the Competent Specialist of the GMCH certifying the petitioner to be clinically fit has not been discussed. There is also no finding in terms of the guidelines in the hospitalization report to indicate whether it is of transient nature due to excitement or due to any organic disease. 9. Under such circumstances, it is a clear case where there are two medical reports giving two contrary findings or indications. 10. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the matter can be appropriately resolved by remitting it to the Review Medical Board to re-examine the petitioner in the presence of the concerned specialist from the Civil Hospital, and upon correlation of all the medical reports and the findings of the review medical examination, a reasoned order shall be passed. If, after proper examination as directed, the petitioner is found to be medically fit, necessary consequential order for the petitioner’s appointment to the service shall be issued. If, on the other hand, the petitioner is found to be medically unfit in terms of the medical examination that will be undertaken by following the procedure, then appropriate order rejecting the candidature of the petitioner on medical grounds shall be issued. The petitioner will appear before the Medical Authorities within a period of 2 (two) weeks from the date of receipt of the Page No.# 8/8 certified copy of this order. The petitioner may file a representation duly supported by all the relevant medical documents and reports of tests available with him in original. If the petitioner appears before the authorities as directed, 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 a prescribed format as may be deemed necessary, 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. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of in terms of the above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant