Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 14081 (CAL)

SATYAJIT MONDAL v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

WPA/29621/2025 · 2026-05-06

Amrita Sinha

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

6th May, 2026 Item no.D/L 15 Court No. 18 Pradip, A.R.(Ct.) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Case No. WPA 29621 of 2025 In the matter of: Satyajit Mondal …. Petitioner VS. Union of India & Ors. ….Respondents For the Petitioner: Mr. Purna Chandra Maiti Ms. Raj Lakshmi Shaw ….Advocates For the Respondents: Mr. Sounak Bera Mr. Avinash Kankani ….Advocates 1. Exception of the petitioner to the report by the respondent authorities filed in Court today is taken on record. 2. The petitioner participated for recruitment as Constable-GD in Central Armed Police Forces, SSF, Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles and Sepoy in Narcotics Control Bureau Examination, 2025. 3. He has been declared medically unfit by the Review Medical Board due to post tympanoplasty graft c mild discharge (Rt). 4. The petitioner in his exception to the report filed by the recruiting authority has averred in paragraph 3 that the otoendoscopy and tympanometry report of the Gouri Devi Institute of Medical Sciences and Hospital is contrary to the report obtained by him from the Christian Medical College (CMC), Vellore where he got himself medically examined. Page 2 5. The petitioner also got himself medically examined in State Government hospital and obtained a fit certificate in his favour. 6. The petitioner is aggrieved by the manner in which he has been medically examined by the Detailed Medical Examination Board and the Review Medical Examination Board. 7. Prayer has been made to reevaluate and reexamine the physical fitness of the petitioner by an independent medical board. 8. Submission of the petitioner is opposed by the learned advocate representing the respondents. 9. As per the Recruitment Rules, the decision of the Review Medical Board is final and no appeal can be entertained. 10. As it appears that the expert doctors of the recruiting authority detected the aforementioned defect in the petitioner which is a ground for disqualification of candidature, accordingly, the Court is not inclined to interfere with the said finding. 11. As the petitioner participated for recruitment in the Central Armed Police Force, the medical certificate relied upon by the petitioner obtained from any other authority in support of the submission that he does not suffer from any such defect, cannot be accepted. 12. The standard of fitness of a civilian is not the same as required in the armed forces where strict and stringent methods to assess physical fitness are resorted to. 13. In view of the above, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in the instant writ petition. The writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Page 3 14. Parties to act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 15. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Amrita Sinha, J.)