Page No.# 1/10 GAHC010099182026 2026:GAU-AS:9919 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2926/2026 EX -TC- 61611- RECT/GD SATISH S/O OM PRAKASH, R/O- VILL AND P.O. PUNCH GAON, P.S. MANISAR, DIST. GURGAON, HARYANA, PIN NO 134102 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVT. OF INDIA, NEW DELHI 1 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL ASSAM RIFLES NONGRIMMAW LAITUMUKHRAH GORALINE SHILLONG MEGHALAYA 793011 3:THE DEPUTY COMMANDANT STAFF OFFICER 1 (RECRUITMENT) OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL ASSAM RIFLES NONGRIMMAW LAITUMUKHRAH GORALINE SHILLONG MEGHALAYA 793011 4:THE DEPUTY COMMANDANT ASSAM RIFLES Page No.# 2/10 TRANSIT CAMP KHANAPARA GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN 781022 5:THE COMMANDANT ASSAM RIFLES TRAINING CENTRE AND SCHOOL DIMAPUR NAGALAND PIN- 797115 6:THE PRESIDING OFFICER REVIEW MEDICAL BOARD COMPOSITE HOSPITAL CRPF AMERIGOG ASSAM GUWAHATI -2 Advocate for the Petitioner : MD H R AHMED, MR A MALEK Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR H GUPTA BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 20.07.2026 Heard Mr. H.R. Ahmed, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. H. Gupta, learned C.G.C, appearing for the Respondents. 2. As consented to by the learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is taken up for final consideration at the motion stage itself. 3. The petitioner in the present writ petition has presented a challenge to a finding recorded by the Review Medical Board dated 15-11-2024, Page No.# 3/10 holding the petitioner, herein, unfit for recruitment and continuation as a Rifleman (General Duty) in Assam Rifles. 4. As projected in the petition, the petitioner having been selected in the recruitment exercise so carried out came to be provisionally appointed as a Rifleman (General Duty) in the Assam Rifles. The petitioner was thereafter, sent for undergoing training at the Assam Rifles Training Centre and School, Dimapur, Nagaland. While the petitioner was undergoing training in the said training centre, he was subjected to a medical examination and therein, he being found to be unfit on account of “Fine Tremors” detected, the petitioner came to be discharged from his services vide an order dated 31-10-2001. The petitioner being aggrieved by his said order of discharge, assailed the same by way of filing a writ petition before this Court being WP(C).No.1956/2010. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11-09-2012, noticing an earlier order dated 10-08-2012 passed in WP(C).No.1515/2006, proceeded to dispose of the said writ petition preferred by the petitioner, herein, by requiring his case to be considered afresh by a Appellate Medical Board comprising of at least one doctor having expertise in the particular field of disability suffered by the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner was directed to appear before a Review Medical Board constituted for the purpose at the Composite Hospital, CRPF, Assam, on 15-11-2024. Page No.# 4/10 The Medical Board as constituted examined the petitioner and held the petitioner unfit for continuation in his service on the ground that he was found to be suffering from “Fine Tremors” in both hands, hypertension and defective near vision in both eyes. Being aggrieved by the said opinion rendered by the Review Medical Board constituted in the matter, the petitioner assailed the same before this Court by way of instituting a writ petition being WP(C).No.4700/2019. Accordingly, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on finding discrepancies in the opinion so rendered by the Appellate Medical Board, proceeded vide order dated 15-12-2023, to dispose of the said writ petition with a direction to the Respondent Authorities to constitute a Appellate Medical Board/Review Medical Board for examining the medical fitness of the petitioner. It was further provided that, in the event, the petitioner is found on his such medical examination to be fit, the respondents would consider the candidature of the petitioner for continuation in service in Assam Rifles by recalling the discharge certificate dated 09-10-2001. In pursuance to the said directions passed by this Court, got himself also examined at the Civil Hospital, Sector 10, Gurugram, and therein, on examination, the Ophthalmologist examining the petitioner opined that vision of both eyes of the petitioner was normal. The directions passed by this Court vide order dated 15-12-2023 in WP(C).No.4700/2019, not having been complied with, the petitioner instituted a contempt case being Page No.# 5/10 Contempt Case No.275/2024. During the pendency of the said contempt case, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, furnished a copy of an opinion rendered by a Review Medical Board constituted for the purpose of examining the petitioner in terms of the directions passed by this Court vide the said order dated 15-12-2023. The said opinion had again found the petitioner to be unfit for continuation in his services in the Assam Rifles. Accordingly, the contempt petition came to be closed vide an order dated 21-03-2025, reserving liberty to the petitioner to assail the opinion of the Medical Board as contained in the order dated 15-12-2023, by instituting an appropriate proceedings. Accordingly, the petitioner has instituted the present petition assailing the findings of the Review Medical Board dated 15-11-2024. 5. Mr. H.R. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Review Medical Board, as constituted in the matter consisted of a Medicine Specialist, a Pulmonologist and a Pediatrician. However, the petitioner was held by the said Board to be suffering from enhanced physiological tremor and accordingly, he was declared to be unfit for continuation in his services. Mr. Ahmed has submitted that a Specialist concerning the disability detected in respect of the petitioner not being part of the Review Medical Board as constituted in the matter, the opinion rendered by the said Board would not mandate an acceptance from this Court. He submits that a Neurologist was mandated to be made a member Page No.# 6/10 of the Review Medical Board considering the fact that the disability detected in respect of the petitioner was a detection of “Fine Tremors” in both his hands. He submits that although the petitioner was referred to the Cardiothoracic And Neurosciences Center of the Gauhati Medical College & Hospital, the same would not be of any consequence, inasmuch as, the Review Medical Board which had taken the final decision ought to have had a Neurologist as one of its members. Mr. Ahmed, submits that the conclusion reached by the Medical Board, that the petitioner was found to suffer from “fine tremors” in both hands is vague, inconclusive and unsupported by any detailed neurological assessment and/or scientific evaluation. 5.1. Mr. H.R. Ahmed, further submits that the Review Medical Board further failed to opine as to whether the alleged tremors suffered by the petitioner were pathological in nature, permanent, functional and had the effect of disabling him from discharging the duties which he was so required to discharge as a member of the Assam Rifles. Accordingly, Mr. Ahmed submits that the opinion rendered by the Review Medical Board on 15-11- 2024, would mandate an interference from this Court. 6. Per contra, Mr. H. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in pursuance to the directions passed by this Court vide the order dated 15-12-2023 in WP(C).No.4700/2019, the petitioner was referred to the Cardiothoracic And Neurosciences Center of the Gauhati Medical College & Hospital, and the opinion of a Neuro Physician, therein, was Page No.# 7/10 obtained. He submits that the Neuro Physician of Gauhati Medical College & Hospital, had detected the petitioner to have been suffering from enhanced physiological tremors. Thereafter, basing on the said report, the Review Medical Board had proceeded to conclude that the petitioner was unfit for continuation in his services in the Assam Rifles and for reinstatement in his services in Assam Rifles. 6.1. Mr. H. Gupta has further submitted that although a Neurologist was not included in the Review Medical Board as constituted in the matter, the petitioner was forwarded to the Cardiothoracic And Neurosciences Center of Gauhati Medical College & Hospital and it was on the basis of the said report of the doctor of the said center that the Review Medical Board, had reached a decision that the petitioner was unfit for continuation for reinstatement in his services in the Assam Rifles. Mr. Gupta submits that the said opinion rendered by the Review Medical Board having not been demonstrated by the petitioner to be erroneous in any manner, the said decision of the Review Medical Board would not mandate any interference from this Court. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 8. After the petitioner was appointed in the Assam Rifles on 23-05- 2001, and was deputed for undergoing treatment, it is found that the petitioner while undergoing the said training, was medically examined and was found to be unfit and came to be discharged from his services vide an Page No.# 8/10 order dated 31-10-2001. The said order of his discharge was assailed by the petitioner before this Court by way of instituting a writ petition being WP(C).No.1956/2010, which was disposed of by a Co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 11-09-2012, requiring a fresh medical examination of the petitioner by an Appellate Medical Board. Thereafter, the petitioner was again examined by a Medical Board constituted in the matter and the Medical Board, vide its opinion dated 12-10-2012, had again held the petitioner to be medically unfit on account of “Fine Tremors” in his both hands. The said opinion of the Medical Board was again put to challenge before this Court by the petitioner, by way of instituting a writ petition being WP(C).No.4700/2019 and this Court having found discrepancies in the opinion rendered by the said Medical Board, had held that the petitioner was entitled for a proper review by a Medical Board. Accordingly, vide order dated 15-12-2023, the said writ petition was disposed of, directing the respondents to constitute a fresh Appeal Medical Board/Review Medical Board for the examination of the petitioner. A Review Medical Board was accordingly constituted. However, it is found that the said Medical Board did not have a Neurologist as one of its constituents. 9. It is on account of the said non-inclusion of a Neurologist as one of the members of the Review Medical Board, that the petitioner came to be referred to the Cardiothoracic and Neurosciences Center, Gauhati Medical College & Hospital for his examination. The petitioner was accordingly, Page No.# 9/10 examined by a Neuro Physician at the said centre and it was opined that the petitioner was found to be suffering from enhanced physiological tremors. The report of the Neurologist of the said center was, thereafter, considered by the constituted Review Medical Board and the Review Medical Board accepting the said opinion rendered in the matter by the Neurologist of the said centre of the Gauhati Medical College & Hospital, proceeded in its proceedings held on 15-11-2024, to hold that the petitioner was found to be unfit on account of tremors of both hands, hypertension and defective near vision in both eyes. The opinion of the said Medical Board, in so far as the disability suffered by the petitioner of having tremors in both hands, in the considered view of this court, is sufficient for the purpose of holding that he was medically unfit and was not entitled to a reinstatement in the Assam Rifles. 10. This Court is of the considered view that the decision of the Review Medical Board, which is again based on an opinion given by a Specialist in the field of Neurology of the Cardiothoracic And Neurosciences Center of Gauhati Medical College & Hospital, has to be given primacy and to be treated as final. This Court does not have the expertise to undo the said opinion given by Specialist in the field of Neurology. 11. This Court further finds that the petitioner has not alleged any malafide intent and/or bias against the members of the Review Medical Board. Further, there is no material brought on record by the petitioner to Page No.# 10/10 allege that the conclusions reached by the Review Medical Board, basing on the said opinion of the Neurologist, is perverse. 12. Accordingly, this Court holds that the opinion rendered by the Review Medical Board on 15-11-2024, is held to be final and no interference, thereof, would be mandated to be made by this Court. 13. Accordingly, the challenge as presented by the petitioner to the decision of the Review Medical Board dated 15-11-2024, would not mandate an acceptance and accordingly, the said challenge stands rejected. 14. In view of the above, the present petition is held to be devoid of any merit and accordingly, the same stands dismissed. However, there would be no order as to costs. JUDGE Comparing Assistant