Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010289752025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/115/2026 SRI DILWAR HUSSAIN S.O-FARUK AHMED, R.O -VILL. GAMARIA, P.O-GAMARIA, P.S- RAMKRISHNA NAGAR, DIST.-SRIBHUMI, ASSAM, PIN-788156 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHRS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, KARTAVYA BHAVAN 03, JANAPATH, NEW DELHI, PIN- 110001 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL (D AND G) CAPF CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD DELHI 110003 3:DME BOARD TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER CT GD 2025 RECTT DME BOARD GC CRPF SILCHAR 788014 4:THE REGISTRAR OF ORTHOPEDICS SILCHAR MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL GHUNGOOR SILCHAR DIST CACHAR ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 PIN 788014 5:RME BOARD TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER CT GD 2025 RECTT RME BOARD GC CRPF SILCHAR 788014 6:THE STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION (SSC) REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN SSC BLOCK NO 12 CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI 11000 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S ROY, M. HOSSAIN,MR. M H LASKAR Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. S S ROY(R-1TO 6) – B E F O R E – HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA Advocate for the petitioners : Mr. M.H. Laskar, Advocate Advocate for the respondents : Mr. S.S Roy, CGC · Date on which Judgment was reserved : NA · Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 14.05.2026 · Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative Part of the Judgment : No · Whether the full Judgment has been Pronounced : Yes Page No.# 3/4 JUDGMENT AND ORDER(ORAL) Heard Mr. M.H. Laskar, 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 05.09.2024 issued by the Staff Selection Commission, applied for the recruitment to the post of Constable (GD) in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), SSF, and Rifleman (GD) in Assam Rifles and Sepoy in Narcotics Control Bureau Examination for the year-2025. The petitioner claims to assert eligibility for the post, thus 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 Medical Examinations, i.e. Detailed Medical Examination, he was found unfit on the grounds of (i) Left Shoulder lower than right and (ii) Left shoulder griddle asymmetry. After DME, he was sent for opinion before the Silchar Medical College and Hospital which also returned a finding that the Right Scapula is at higher level. The Civil Hospital had also undertaken an X-ray where the X-Ray report reflects the following: (i) Bony outline and density appear normal; (ii) the visualized joint spaces appear normal; and (iii) the soft tissue shadow appears normal. 3. All these reports were placed before the Review Medical Examination (RME) and the RME sustained the report of the DME and rejected the petitioner. Although the petitioner was examined by the Silchar College and Hospital, Department of Orthopedics and they have noted the conditions of the petitioner’s health condition namely Right Scapula at higher level and muscle power is found to be normal. The fact is that there is no opinion rendered by the Silchar Medical College and Hospital although the X-Ray report is also Page No.# 4/4 available that as to whether the petitioner is or is not fit for employment under the CAPF. 4. In the opinion of the Court where there is a medical opinion sought for and prima facie it appears to the Court that the X-Ray report conducted does not reflect any infirmity. 5. Upon perusal of the report, which is the part of the record, which are placed before the Court, the Court is of the view that the petitioner can be permitted to file a representation before the respondent No. 5-Review Medical Board for re-examination of the petitioner along with all medical records available in the records and the report of the Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Orthopedic Department. If the petitioner is otherwise found suitable in terms of the examination undertaken at the Silchar Medical College and Hospital then consequential orders for selection and appointment of the writ petitioner should be issued. The petitioner is permitted to file a representation within 10 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Upon receipt of such a representation, we direct the RME will conduct the medical review within further period of 60 days therefrom. 6. The writ petition stands accordingly disposed of. Interim order if any stands merged. JUDGE Comparing Assistant