Bombay High Court
Ganesh Kailas Shelke vs Union Of India, Through Secretary ... on 24 March, 2023
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar, M. W. Chandwani
1 925-wp-4385-19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 4385 OF 2019
Ganesh Kailas Shelke
Vs.
Union of India and others
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's order
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Bhawana M. Kasare, Advocate for petitioner.
Ms. M. P. Munshi, Advocate for respondents.
CORAM :- A. S. CHANDURKAR & M. W. CHANDWANI, JJ.
DATED :- 24.03.2023.
The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the communication dated 08.04.2019 issued by the Commandant, Group Center, Central Reserve Police Force, Nagpur. The petitioner came to be recruited on the post of Constable with Central Reserve Police Force (for short, "CRPF") by the communication dated 18.11.2017. The appointment was on a combatised post and it was temporary in nature. The probation period of the petitioner was for two years. On detecting that the ring finger of left hand of the petitioner had been amputated, he was referred to the Medical Board, which examined him and found him to be unfit to undergo training as well as combatised service with the CRPF. In view of this opinion, the impugned communication came to be issued terminating the petitioner's engagement.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that while being recruited, the petitioner had been medically RR Jaiswal ::: Uploaded on - 27/03/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2023 04:35:06 ::: 2 925-wp-4385-19.odt examined and on being found fit, he had been issued the order of appointment dated 06.01.2018. There was no question of the petitioner suppressing his medical fitness. The Medical Board however without considering the overall fitness of the petitioner declared him to be unfit on account of amputation of the ring finger of his left hand. The petitioner during the course of service had participated in all training camps and there was no grievance in that regard and on that count, termination of services was not justified.
3. The learned counsel for the respondents referred to the affidavit in reply as filed including report of the Medical Board declaring the petitioner to be unfit. It is submitted that during the initial medical examination, the petitioner was not appropriately examined and hence, amputation could not be detected. Subsequently, when the report of Medical Board was received and the petitioner was found to be medically unfit, action was initiated against the Medical Officer, who had conducted the initial medical test. Since, the petitioner was found to be medically unfit his appointment was put to an end. Hence, there was no reason to interfere with the impugned action.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused documents on record. We are satisfied that no illegality has been committed by the respondents while terminating the appointment of the petitioner. The fact that the ring finger of the petitioner's left hand has been amputated has not been disputed and the report of the Medical Board supports this position. On noticing that the petitioner had failed to disclose RR Jaiswal ::: Uploaded on - 27/03/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2023 04:35:06 ::: 3 925-wp-4385-19.odt the same in application form as well as the fact that this condition had been overlooked in the initial medical examination, the respondents have initiated action against the concerned Medical Officers who had examined the petitioner. The termination of the petitioner's appointment is based on Government Order dated 20.05.2015 that pertains to recruitment with the CRPF with regard to a candidate found medically unfit. We thus find that the impugned action is in accordance with law and there is no reason to interfere in writ jurisdiction. The Writ Petition is therefore dismissed. No costs.
(M. W. CHANDWANI, J.) (A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.) RR Jaiswal ::: Uploaded on - 27/03/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2023 04:35:06 :::