Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).1877/2007
(From the judgement and order dated 07/08/2006 in CWP No. 13031/2003 of The HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH)
AJAY KUMAR Petitioner(s)
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(With prayer for interim relief and office report )
Date: 14/05/2009 This Petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK VERMA
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv.
For Mr. D. Mahesh Babu,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Subhash Kaushik, Adv.
Mr. S.N. Terdal, Adv.
For Ms. Sushma Suri,Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order.
(R.K. Dhawan) (Shashi Bala Vij)
Court Master Court Master
(Signed order is placed on the file)
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.3578 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.1877 of 2007)
The appellant was originally recruited as constable in CRPF but during the
course of medical examination it was found that his vision was not normal. Then he was
subjected to Examination by the Medical Board on 24th April, 2002 and it was found that
though he had no manifest squint, he had moderate exophoria with slow recovery and
ultimately the Board opined that the candidate is fit for the job of Constable in CRPF. But
subsequently on 24th March, 2003, his services were terminated on the ground that the
Director of Medical Directorate found him unsuitable. The appellant filed a writ petition and
the High Court referred the matter to the Medical Board consisting of some senior doctors
from the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh. The
Medical Board gave the following opinion:
“He had unaided visual acuity of 6/6 in both eyes and his color vision and
fundus examination was found
to be within normal limits. He has no manifest squint. However, he has exophoria for near with slow recovery. Worth four dot test showed binocular
single vision. In our opinion, the candidate is fit for the job of Constable in CRPF.”
In view of the medical opinion expressed by the Medical Board of the Postgraduate
Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, we are unable to agree with the
respondent that the appellant is not medically fit. Respondents are directed to reinstate the
appellant forthwith. The appellant is not entitled to get back wages for the period he was out
of service. But for the period he was in service, the wages may be paid as soon as he is
reinstated in service.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
MAY 14, 2009.