Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Allahabad High Court

State Of Uttar Pradesh Through Its ... vs Jay Kumar on 29 September, 2020

Author: Govind Mathur

Bench: Govind Mathur, Siddhartha Varma





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Chief Justice's Court
 

 
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 663 of 2020
 

 
Appellant :- State Of Uttar Pradesh Through Its Chief/ Secretary (Home) And 3 Others
 
Respondent :- Jay Kumar
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Chandan Kumar
 

 
Hon'ble Govind Mathur,Chief Justice
 
Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.
 

Order on Delay Condonation Application This appeal is barred by limitation from 277 days. However, ignoring the same, we have looked into merits of the case.

Order on Memo of Appeal The argument advanced by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants is that as per the applicable rules, the respondent-petitioner was physically examined and he was found suffering from hearing impairment. Learned Single Judge failed to appreciate the scheme of the rules and relied upon the findings arrived by a Board of Doctors which is otherwise not prescribed under the Rules.

We do not find any merit in the argument advanced. The candidature of the petitioner was rejected at the time of recruitment to the post of Constable by arriving at a conclusion that he was suffering from hearing impairment. On being challenged the same by way of filing the petition of writ, the Writ Court appointed three members' Committee to medically and physically examine the respondent-petitioner. The appellant-respondent accepted the appointment of such Committee and in presence of Commandant 42nd Battalion PAC, Naini, Prayagraj, the respondent-petitioner was medically and physically re-examined. The Committee gave a finding that petitioner was not suffering from hearing impairment. Learned Single Judge while accepting the finding given by the Committee accepted the writ petition and directed respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for appointment by treating him physically fit. We do not find anything wrong with the judgement impugned as the competent Committee constituted by the Court and accepted by the respondent-appellant, gave a definite finding about the fitness of the respondent-petitioner. No interference is warranted.

In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed.

Order Date :- 29.9.2020 Siddhant (Govind Mathur,C.J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.)