GAHC010147662017

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C) 6954/2017

1:VIVEK CHAUHAN S/O RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN VILL- PUB -SILPUTA, P.O. PUB SILPUTA P.S. BAKALIA, DIST. KARBI ANGLONG.

VERSUS

1:THE UNION OF INDIA and 5 ORS. THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVT. OF INDIA, NEW DELHI- 110001.

2:THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL CRPF CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI- 110003.

3:THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION NORTH EAST REGION HOUSEFED COMPLEX BELTOLA- BASISTHA ROAD P.O. ASSAM SACHIVALAYA GUWAHATI -06.

4:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE CISF UNIT ONGC NAZIRA DIST. SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN - 785685.

5:THE COMMANDANT CHAIRMAN DOSSIER SCRUTINY BOARD CISF UNIT ONGC NAZIRA DIST. SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN - 785685.

6:THE ASSISTANAT COMMANDANT ADM CISF UNIT ONGC NAZIRA DIST. SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN - 785685

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.R ALI

Advocate for the Respondent : C.G.C.

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

ORDER

25.05.2018

Heard Mr. R. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. S.C. Keyal, Asstt. S.G.I. assisted by Mr. H. Gupta, CGC.

2. The petitioner's case is that despite having been selected for filing up the vacant post of Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), the respondents have not issued any appointment letter to the petitioner.

3. The petitioner's case in brief is that in pursuance to the advertisement dated 24.01.20155 for recruitment to the post of Constable (GD) in BSF, CRPF, CISF, ITBP, SSB, NIA, SSF and Rifleman in Assam Rifle, the petitioner made an application for the same. In the Physical Standard Test conducted on 25.05.2015, the petitioner was found to be fit. The petitioner also cleared the written test on 04.10.2015. Thereafter, select list dated 02.02.2017 was issued by the State respondents wherein, the same showed that the petitioner had been selected for appointment as Constable of the CISF. Despite the above, the petitioner was not given any appointment letter. Consequently, the petitioner made an application under the RTI Act on 24.05.2017, questioning the respondents, the reason as to why he had not been appointed. The Commandant of the CISF issued a letter dated 13.10.2017 stating that the petitioner was not qualified for recruitment as he was erroneously declared FIT.

4. The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner was never communicated with his medical result, so as to enable him to apply for a Review Medical Examination, with regard to the alleged finding by the respondents in the Medical Examination, which allegedly showed him to be unfit.

5. Mr. S. C. Keyal, Asstt. S.G.I., on the other hand, submits that the petitioner was well aware that he had been found to be medically unfit by the medical examination. In fact, the result of the medical examination held on 18.05.2016 bore of the signature of the petitioner. In view of the fact that the petitioner was erroneously declared FIT, the petitioner had been selected vide select list dated 02.02.2017, as the Selection Committee had overlooked the Medical Examination. He however submits that the respondents are willing to conduct a review medical examination under the Review Medical Board, to ascertain whether the petitioner is medically fit or not.

6. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

7. The medical examination certificate of the petitioner dated 18.05.2016 bears the signature of the petitioner, thereby implying that the petitioner was aware of his colour blindness CP-IV. The petitioner cannot claim that he had signed a blank document as it is not expected of a reasonable person to sign a document with closed eyes. Be that as it may, as the Asstt. SGI has submitted that the respondents are willing to conduct a Review Medical Examination by a Review Medical Board in respect of the petitioner's medical condition, this writ petition is disposed off with a direction to the respondents to constitute a Review Medical Board.

8. The Review Medical Board shall thereafter, call the petitioner for a review medical examination. It is needless to add that if the petitioner is found to be medically fit, appointment order should be issued to the petitioner as per the select list dated 02.02.2017. The review medical examination should be conducted within a period of 2(two) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

9. Consequently, the letter dated 13.10.2017 issued by the Commandant, Office of the Deputy Inspector General, CISF, is hereby set aside.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant