2026:CGHC:3235 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 562 of 2026 1. Sandeep Bhanu S/o Ramlal Bhanu Aged About 24 Years R/o Baram Chauk, Malhar, Masturi, District Bilaspur C.G. 2. Suresh Beck S/o Bandhu Beck Aged About 26 Years R/o W.No. 19, Patel Para, Sonbarsa, District Surguja C.G. ... Petitioners versus 1. Union Of India Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affair, New Delhi. 2. Ministry Of Home Affairs Through Director General, C R P F (Recruitment Branch), East Block- 07, Level-04, Sec-01, R.K. Puram, New Delhi- 110066. 3. Staff Selection Commission Block No. 12, C G O- Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003. 4. Inspector General Of Police, Chhattisgarh Sector H Q, C R P F, Sector - 17, Near P H Q, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur C.G. 5. C R P F, Bilaspur, Group Centre C R P F Bharni, P.O.- Ganiyari, District Bilaspur C.G. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Deblina Maity, Advocate For Respondent-UOI. : Mr. R.K. Mishra, DSGI. Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 20/01/2026 1. Petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs. “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the records relating to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That, it is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct Respondent No. 2 & 5 and All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Raipur, C.G. to examine the physical fitness of the petitioners from a competent Medical Board, in the light of requirement of CRPF, in the interest of justice. PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 10.3 Any other relief, which Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners participated in the recruitment proceeding initiated by respondents for the post of Constable (GD) in CAPFs, NIA, SSF and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles Examination 2025 which was conducted by Staff Selection Commission. Petitioners submitted their forms as candidates belonging to Scheduled Tribe category. Petitioners have cleared the written Computer Based Examination, Physical Standard Test, Physical Efficiency Test but at the time of medical examination, they were declared unfit. Petitioners thereafter have re- examined by Review Medical Board and Review Medical Board also declared them unfit due to “PERSISTENT TREMORS AND HYPER HIDROSIS AND ANXIETY NEUROSIS”. Petitioners were not examined by Neurosurgeon and therefore petitioners have submitted an application for their medical examination by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), which was not considered and therefore this writ petition is filed. She submits that in the identical facts of the case, High Court of Rajasthan has passed an order in favour of petitioner therein and he was directed to examine by AIIMS. Therefore, similar orders be passed in favour of petitioners herein also. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposes the submission of learned counsel for petitioners and would submit that respondents authorities are having team of expert doctors. Petitioners who were declared unfit at the time of medical examination were re-examined by the Review Medical Board and the Board has also found petitioners unfit and therefore petitioners are having no case for the relief as prayed for. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents enclosed along with writ petition. 5. At page No. 97 & 98 of the writ petition, petitioners have filed documents regarding medical examination of CT/GD Exam-2025 and it was issued in favour of petitioners in a memorandum unfit. The doctor examined the petitioners, have assigned reasons of being unfit due to ‘Hyperhedrosis and Tremors’. Petitioners thereafter again examined by Review Medical Board and the Review Medical Board has declared the petitioners unfit observing “Unfit Due to Persistent Tremors And Hyper Hidrosis And Anxiety Neurosis”. Petitioners were examined by team of doctors who are members of Review Medical Board. 6. According to the procedure prescribed, if the applicant/ candidate is dissatisfied with the report of his medical examination by doctor, he/she can avail the right, for referring to him/her to the Review Medical Board. Petitioners have already examined by the Review Medical Board consisting team of doctors and they have also found petitioners to be unfit and the reason for unfit is also one of the reason assigned by the doctor who examined petitioner in detail at the time of his medical examination. Doctors have found that petitioners are suffering with Tremors and Hyperhidrosis therefore they are unfit for their appointment on the post applied for by them. 7. When under the proceedings/ rules, mechanism is provided for the applicant having grievance against the report of his medical examination by doctor at the time of detailed examination. If he/ she is held unfit, upon asking his/ her reference for the review medical board they will be examined by Review Medical Board. Petitioners have already been referred to the Review Medical Board. There is no allegation that petitioners have been declared unfit for any of the oblique reason and therefore the report of the Review Medical Board cannot be questioned. Review Medical Board is constituted by team of doctors and are expert in their field. 8. The decision which is relied upon by the counsel for petitioners has not discussed the law and has not laid down the law but has considered the limited prayer in the facts of that case and therefore petitioners cannot get the benefit of the same. 9. For the foregoing discussion, I do not find any good ground to admit this writ petition and accordingly this writ petition is dismissed at admission stage. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE