Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 38671 (CAL)

VIVEK THAKUR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

WPA/28700/2025 · 2026-09-07

Reetobroto Kumar Mitra

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

07.09.2026 56 sdas WPA 28700 of 2025 Vivek Thakur Vs. Union of India & Ors. Mr. Debasish Kundu Mr. Sudeepto Kumar Basu Mr. Bidan Modak Ms. Doyel Dey ….. for the petitioner Mr. Ram Chandra Agarwal Mr. Tapan Bhanja Mr. Gourab Karmakar ….. for the UOI 1. The petitioner is a successful candidate who had participated in the selection process for appointment as Constable (GD) in Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs). 2. Upon being successful in the written examination, Physical Standard Test (PST) and Physical Efficiency Test (PET), the petitioner underwent a Detailed Medical Examination (DME) and was found to have a condition, medically termed as “keloid”. 3. The petitioner being aggrieved, went for a Review Medical Examination (RME), whereupon it was found that the keloid present over upper end of the Sternum was such that it would impede and interfere with the petitioner wearing a combatised clothing. It was on this ground that the petitioner’s candidature was rejected. 2 4. In view of several investigations conducted by the petitioner, independently from that of the Medical Board of the Authorities, the keloid was found to be present on the petitioner’s body. 5. The medical guidelines prescribed for the purpose, indicates in Clause 9 of Chapter XIIB that keloid formation interfering with the proper wearing of combatised equipment, is disqualifying. 6. In this particular case, the Review Medical Examination has clearly opined that the petitioner’s keloid is of a nature, which will interfere and impeded wearing of combatised equipment including uniform and gear. 7. Thus, the petitioner has been rightly held to be medically unfit to be engaged as a member of a specialized force such as any one of the CAPFs. 8. In view thereof, I do not find any reason to interfere with the finding of the authorities in any manner. 9. In view of the aforestated finding, the writ petition is dismissed. 10. There will be no order as to costs. 11. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon usual undertakings. (Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.)