Central Administrative Tribunal - Hyderabad
B Aruna vs Indian Statistical Service (Iss) on 9 September, 2025
1
OA.No.760/2022
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCH, HYDERABAD
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.021/00760/2022
ORDER RESERVED ON 28.07.2025
DATE OF ORDER: 09.09.2025
HON'BLE DR. LATA BASWARAJ PATNE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
B.Aruna, D/o B.Anjaneyulu
Age: 38 years, Occ: Junior Statistical Officer (Group-B)
Regional Office, National Statistical Office
R & B Complex, AC Guards, Hyderabad
R/o 4-5-136/13, Sri Ram Nagar
Nacharam, Hyderabad - 500 076. .....Applicant
(By Advocate: Sri K.R.K.V.Prasad)
Vs.
1. Union of India, Rep. by the Secretary
Ministry of Statistics and Program Implementation
Indian Statistical Service Division
Government of India
Kurshid Lal Bhavan
Janpath, New Delhi-110001.
2. Union Public Service Commission
Rep. by its Secretary
Dholpur House, Shah Jahan Road
New Delhi-110001.
3. The Secretary
Department of Disability Affairs
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment
Government of India, New Delhi.
4. Lady Hardinge Medical College
Rep. by the Central Standing Medical Board
Shaheed Bhagat Singh Marg, DIZ Area
Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001.
5. Dr.Ram Manohar Lohiya Hospital
Rep. by the Chairman
Central Standing Medical Board, New Delhi. ....Respondents
(By Advocates: Smt.B.Gayatri Varma, Sr.CGSC & Sri K.Ajay Kumar)
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=
DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=
500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193
1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=
ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0
ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER=
35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181
3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI
SANDHYA
SANDHYA
Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0
2
OA.No.760/2022
ORDER
PER: HON'BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief:
"....to call for the records pertaining to the intimation given by the 1st Respondent office to the applicant vide letter dated 19.04.2022 that the applicant has been declared as unfit for appointment into Indian Statistical Service against the Physically handicapped (PH) category, followed by letter dated 05.07.2022 to the effect that on re-medical examination, the applicant is found unfit for the said appointment on account of less than 40% specified disability; and quash and set aside the said decision conveyed vide the impugned letters as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the disability certificate dated 27.04.2022 and the law; and consequently direct the 1st Respondent to appoint the applicant into Indian Statistical Service (2021 Batch) and treat the applicant as joined in the said service w.e.f. 14.02.2022 on par with the candidates appointed in pursuance of results declared on 13.12.2021 and grant all consequential benefits and pass such other orders or orders as deemed fit in the interest of justice."
2. The facts of the case, in a nutshell, as submitted by the applicant, are as follows:
i. The applicant is currently working as a Junior Statistical Officer (Group-B) in the Field Operations Division at the National Statistical Office in the Regional Office at Hyderabad, under the 1st Respondent Ministry. Based on the certificate, dt.24.04.2017, issued by the Government ENT Hospital, Koti, Hyderabad, which is a statutory authority that the applicant suffers from 46% impaired hearing disability, she was appointed to the present post by the 1st Respondent Ministry against the Physically Handicapped (PH) category. ii. The 2nd Respondent (Union Public Service Commission) issued a Notification on 07.04.2021, calling for applications for the Indian Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 3 OA.No.760/2022 Economic Service / Indian Statistical Service, 2021, for appointment into Group-A service. The applicant, who is in a Group-B service, applied against the vacancy in the Indian Statistical Service reserved for Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (PwBD) in the deaf and hard of hearing category.
iii. The applicant had qualified in the written examination, general medical examination and also viva voce, but the 1st Respondent (Ministry) sent the impugned letter, dt.19.04.2022, declaring that the applicant as unfit for appointment into the ISS against the PH category, as intimated by the 4th Respondent Medical establishment.
On her request, re-medical examination was conducted by the 5th Respondent Medical establishment. However, the 1st Respondent reiterated the earlier stand, vide the impugned letter, dt.05.07.2022.
iv. It is contended that, on the basis of the hearing impairment history of the applicant since her childhood and the various test reports vis-a-vis the Disability Certificates issued by statutory authorities, the 1st Respondent's decision of declaring the applicant unfit to be appointed against the PH category is patently illegal.
v. Information has been provided in a tabulated form, giving details of various certificates, to show that the disability of the applicant is more than the required 40 percent and that the information in the impugned letters, showing the medical examination results, of the 4th & 5th Respondents Hospitals, displays serious inconsistency in holding that the applicant suffers from less than 40% disability. The purported result of the 4th Respondent Hospital, mentioned in the impugned Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 4 OA.No.760/2022 letter, dt.19.04.2022, is proved to be wrong, by the same Respondent's report, dt.25.08.2022, showing serious fallacy in the impugned decision.
3. Other submissions made by the applicant are summarised below:
i. The applicant, who is in the Group-B service, had applied against the vacancy in the Indian Statistical Service, Group-A, reserved for Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (PwBD), in the deaf and hard of hearing category. The applicant informed the Regional Office, through the proper channel regarding the application against the said vacancy. According to the applicant, the 2nd Respondent found the applicant eligible and the applicant underwent the process of selection, and was declared selected, with Roll No.1080268, in terms of the final result declared by the 2nd Respondent, vide the communication, dt.13.12.2021, enlisting her name at S.No.11, for appointment to the Indian Statistical Service. Except for the applicant, the remaining 10 candidates, including the one, who was placed under the provisional list, were given appointment orders, notifying the joining date.
ii. To the applicant's e-mail, dt.13.02.2022, to the 1st Respondent office, enquiring about her joining date, a reply came from the 1st Respondent office, after her second follow-up mail, that the applicant's joining process was pending on medical grounds, and that the department will inform her later about the date for the medical test, meant for PwBD candidates. On 05.04.2022, the applicant was eventually informed that the medical test will be conducted on 06.04.2022 at the 4th Respondent Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 5 OA.No.760/2022 medical establishment. The medical test was postponed to 07.04.2022.
After the said medical test, the office of the 1st Respondent informed the applicant, through the impugned letter, dt.19.04.2022, that she had been found unfit for appointment against the Physically Handicapped (PH) category, since the Central Standing Medical Board (CSMB for short) had found 18.60% disability in her hearing.
iii. As per Rule 19 of the Rules for ISS Examination, 2021 (ISS Exam Rules, 2021, for short), notified on 07.04.2021, the eligibility for availing reservation against the vacancies reserved for persons with benchmark disability shall be the same as prescribed in the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and that one should have 40% and above impairment in the categories mentioned in Section 34(1) of the said Act.
iv. Thereafter, the applicant applied for medical test and received a renewed certificate from the Government ENT Hospital, Koti, Hyderabad, on 27.04.2022, showing 61% disability with 65 DB loss in the right ear and 70 DB loss in the left ear. It is mentioned that the said certificate contains all the relevant information, showing the loss of decibels and also graphic representation of the disability, supported by audio logical findings. It is contended that the renewed certificate, which is valid for the next 5 years, made it abundantly clear that the applicant is eligible for the said post under the PwBD quota. The applicant sent a reply to the mail, dt.19.04.2022, appealing for a re-
medical examination.
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYAPANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 6 OA.No.760/2022 v. The 1st Respondent Ministry informed the applicant through an email, dt.24.05.2022, that a medical re-examination would be conducted on 27.05.2022, at the Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, New Delhi. After conducting the Pure Tone Audiomerty Test on 27.05.2022, the applicant was asked by the authorities of the 5th Respondent to report for the BERA Test (Brainstem Evoked Response Audiometry) on 30.05.2022. As per the applicant, the test was conducted by the Audiologist, accompanied by a trainee, in a disturbed environment, by repeatedly opening and closing the doors, although the test is required to be conducted in absolute silence. Owing to the external disturbance, during the course of examination of the applicant, the test result varied. The 1st Respondent issued a letter to the 2nd Respondent, endorsing a copy to the applicant, informing him that the Central Standing Medical Board (CSMB) of the 5th Respondent had found 8% disability and, therefore, the applicant was declared unfit on account of less than 40% specified disability.
vi. It is submitted that copies of the aforesaid reports of the Respondent medical establishments were not supplied to the applicant. The reports which find mention in the impugned letters are contrary to various other medical examination reports and also the disability certificates, dt.24.04.2017 and 27.04.2022, issued by the Government ENT Hospital, Koti, Hyderabad. The applicant had encountered hearing problem since childhood. Myringoplasty was done at Warangal, on 24.08.2003, and the 2nd surgery (Tympanoplasy) was performed on Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 7 OA.No.760/2022 20.08.2010 at Hyderabad. Though the perforation in the left ear was closed, the applicant's hearing ability did not improve.
vii. The 3rd Respondent's authority prescribes the parameters for various disabilities for availing subsidy, under the Assistance to Disabled Persons for Purchase (ADIP) Scheme, for hearing impaired with 40% and above disability. The applicant, who intended to use hearing aids, had earlier approached M/s Ali Yavar Jung National Institute for the Hearing Handicapped, Secunderabad, which functions under the aegis of the 3rd Respondent, for evaluation of her disability, way back on 16.11.2015. The said Institute issued an evaluation report, dt.16.11.2015, showing loss of 60 DB and 86.6 DB in the left and the right ears of the applicant, respectively, which clearly showed that the disability of the applicant was above 40%. She has been using hearing aids since then.
viii. It is alleged that since the 5th Respondent medical establishment had conducted the 2nd medical examination casually and with a prejudice, she approached the Ali Yavar Jung National Institute and got a report of hearing assessment, dt.08.06.2022, and the two tests, viz., PTA and BERA confirmed loss of above 60 DB, showing disability above 40%.
Contrary to the positive result given by the Ali Yavar Jung National Institute, which functions under the control of the 3rd Respondent, the 5th Respondent medical establishment gave a negative report, showing false percentage of 8% of disability, far less than the percentage of disability suffered by the applicant.
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYAPANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 8 OA.No.760/2022 ix. The applicant approached the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, on 23.08.2022, as an out patient and the on-duty ENT Doctor advised PTA test and also issue of disability certificate, after conducting Speech Audiometric Test. The right and left ear speech reception showed 80 DB and 75 DB, respectively, which shows disability percentage of above 60. AIIMS had conducted all the tests which are prescribed in the Notification, dt.04.01.2018, issued by the 3rd Respondent Ministry.
x. It is emphasised that the disability percentage shown in the report issued by the AIIMS is similar to the percentage of disability certified by the Government ENT Hospital, Koti, Hyderabad. The decibel loss (DB) in respect of the applicant, in the certificate issued by the Government ENT Hospital, Koti, Hyderabad, is 65-70 DB. The certificate issued by Ali Yavar Jung National Institute for the Hearing Handicapped, Secunderabad, shows 63.3-71.6 DB, and the report from AIIMS shows it as 80-75 DB. The percentage of disability, at all the institutions except one, is above 40%.
xi. It is also stated that the applicant, upset by the report given by the 4th Respondent medical establishment, approached the same medical establishment, as an outpatient, on 25.08.2022, and got the audiogram report. This test was conducted by the very same audiologist who had done it on 06.04.2022. The report showed Bilateral (Both Earns) Moderately Severe Mixed Hearing Loss, similar to the report given by the Ali Yavar Jung National Institute for the Hearing Handicapped, Secunderabad, which put the percentage of disability at 43.7.
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYAPANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 9 OA.No.760/2022 xii. According to the applicant, the percentages recorded in the 1st and the 2nd medical reports, which are shown as 18.6 % and 8%, are nowhere near the percentage of actual disability suffered by the applicant and are, therefore, false. Because of improper medical examination, conducted on both the occasions, the applicant's candidature was rejected, by declaring that the hearing impairment was less than 40%. Thus, gross injustice has been done to the applicant, causing serious prejudice in the matter of appointment to a Group-A service. It is also made out to be a case of gross medical negligence, resulting in Human Right violation.
xiii. As against the 11 notified vacancies, including one vacancy in the disability quota, 10 candidates have joined, way back in February, 2022, whereas the applicant was deprived of the same, despite her suffering the disability, entitling her to be appointed against the lone PwBD vacancy, notified under hearing impairment. In view of the fact that a notification in respect of subsequent examination, 2022, was already issued, notifying 29 vacancies, the unfilled vacancy of 2021 examination would be filled up by a disabled candidate of other category.
4. Grounds advanced by the applicant are as follows:
i. It is evident from the certificate, dt.24.04.2017, issued by the Government ENT Hospital, Koti, Hyderabad, that the applicant suffers from an impaired hearing disability of 46%. The said Hospital, even vide certificate, dt.27.40.2022, confirmed that the applicant suffers from 61% of disability. Based on the first certificate, dt.24.04.2017, the Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 10 OA.No.760/2022 applicant was appointed as a Junior Statistical Officer (Group-B) in the Field Operations Division at the National Statistical Office at the Regional Office, Hyderabad, against the Physically Handicapped (PH) category under the 1st Respondent Ministry. The decibel loss in the certificate issued by Ali Yavar Jung National Institute for the Hearing Handicapped, Secunderabad, is 63.3 - 71.6 DB. Even in the certificate issued by AIIMS, the decibel loss is shown 63.3-71.6 DB and as 80-75 DB, respectively, which establishes that the percentage of disability of the applicant is above 40.
ii. The impugned communications show that the 4th and the 5th Respondent medical establishments declared decibel loss of 50 and 40, and the percentage of disability as 18.6% and 8%, respectively. Such variation in percentage itself shows that something is amiss.
iii. It is alleged that the 4th & the 5th Respondents have issued false certificates negligently, by conducting the tests improperly, defeating the objective of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
iv. The Brainstem Evoked Response Audiometry ((BERA) meant to investigate the hearing level with suspected hearing loss or pathological speech development, ought to have been conducted in absolute silence, whereas it was conducted in a disturbed environment, leading to the unrealistic assessment that the applicant's disability is less than 40%.
v. It is also contended that the Government ENT Hospital, Koti, had issued the disability certificate, duly following the procedure prescribed in the Disability Act, 1995, and also the Disabilities Act, Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 11 OA.No.760/2022 2016. These certificates shall prevail over any other medical report, in the matter of hearing impairment disability, which is permanent and increases over a period of time. The impugned letters are issued by an executive authority, whereas the Disability Certificates were issued by a statutory authority. Thus, the said communication from an executive authority, by merely referring to the medical reports, without furnishing copies of the same, overriding the statutory mechanism, is null and void in law.
vi. The applicant had relied on the Hon'ble Delhi High Court judgment, dt.22.08.2022, in W.P.(C) No.572 of 2020, , holding that, on the face of overwhelming medical reports, the candidate has to be treated as having more than 40% disability, in view of consistent certificates assessing the disability percentage of the petitioner. The Hon'ble Court, after considering the fact that the petitioner therein had emerged as a meritorious candidate, observed that nothing survives to be reinvestigated in regard to the definite findings recorded in respect of the disability. The said judgment is squarely applicable to the case of the applicant, the only difference being that the nature of disability is different.
vii. It is contended that the impugned decision, conveying that the applicant is unfit for appointment, is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution.
5. On notice, Respondents have appeared through their Counsel and submitted their counter, wherein they have averred as follows:Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 12 OA.No.760/2022 i. The Central Standing Medical Board (CSMB), Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi, was requested by the UPSC for conducting medical examination of 22 candidates due for Personality Test / Interview in the ISS Examination-2021, at Delhi. The CSMB, Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi, vide letter No.6-Misc.Report/MB//2021, dt.21.12.2021, (Ann-
II) informed that -
".... Speech Therapist and Audiologist are not available in Safdarjung Hospital. You are requested to arrange the medical examination of Ms.B.Aruna at another hospital due to non availability of Speech therapist and audiologist in Safdarjung Hospital."
ii. Thereafter, on the request of the Ministry of S&PI, vide letter, dt.23.03.2022, medical examination of the applicant was conducted by the CSMB, Lady Hardinge Medical College (LHMC), New Delhi, on 06.04.2022. The Medical Board detected "18.06% disability in hearing".
iii. As per Rule 13 / Appendix III of the ISS Exam Rules, 2021, the applicant was informed, vide letter, dt.19.04.2022, that she is unfit, against the PH category, for appointment in the ISS, on the ground of having 18.6% disability in hearing and that she may prefer an appeal against the decision of the medical board. Thereafter, the applicant, vide letter, dt.27.04.2022, appealed against the decision of the CSMB, Lady Hardinge Medical College, seeking re-medical examination to assess her disability percentage.
iv. Subsequently, the Respondent Ministry, vide letter, dt.04.05.2022, requested the RML Hospital to conduct re-medical exam of the applicant, which was conducted on 27.05.2022. The CSMB, Dr.R.M.L.Hospital, New Delhi, in its report, dt.09.06.2022, found 8% Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 13 OA.No.760/2022 disability in the case of the applicant. Thus, the applicant was found UNFIT for ISS against PH category. Further, in terms of the Rules for ISS Exam, 2021, the procedure for medical examination was completed, and, accordingly, the candidature of the applicant, recommended against the vacancy reserved for PH category in the ISS Exam, 2021, was cancelled, vide order,dt.05.07.2022. v. It is also submitted by the Respondents that Rule 6 (Note 4) of the ISS Exam Rule, 2021, states that -
"Notwithstanding the provisions of age relaxation under Rule 6(b)(vi) above, a person with benchmark Disabilities will be considered to be eligible for appointment only if he/she (after such physical) examination as the Government or appointing authority as the case may be, may prescribe) is found to satisfy the requirement of physical and medical standard for the concerned Services / Posts to be allocated to the persons with Benchmark Disabilities by the government.
vi. According to the Respondents, the assessment of the Medical Examination, conducted by the Government Medical Board, in accordance with the ISS Exam Rules, 2021, is definitive and the Government of India reserve to themselves absolute discretion to reject or accept any candidate, after considering the report of the Medical Board. Any medical report, before or after such an assessment by a medical practitioner, shall have no impact/binding on the outcome of the candidature of a candidate.
vii. It is further submitted that Para 16 of the DoPT OM No.36035/02/2017-Estt., dt.20.06.2017, on INTER-SE EXCHANGE AND CARRY FORWARD OF RESERVATION IN CASE OF DIRECT RECRUITMENT, states that-
"(c) If any vacancy reserved for any category of benchmark disability cannot be filled due to non-availability of a suitable person with that benchmark disability or, for any other sufficient reason, such vacancy Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 14 OA.No.760/2022 shall be carried forward as a 'backlog reserved vacancy' to the subsequent recruitment year."
Accordingly, the said vacancy has to be filled up, as per the extant guidelines.
viii. As per the Respondents, the instant OA is not tenable and deserves to be dismissed.
6. Heard both the parties and perused the materials placed on record.
7. Before taking up the submissions for analysis and adjudication, the following portions of the Notification, dt.07.04.2021, of the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, containing the Rules for the competitive examination to be held by the UPSC, in 2021, for filling up vacancies in the Junior Time Scale (JTS) in the IES & ISS, are extracted for reference:
"15. The prescribed qualifying standard will be relaxable at the discretion of the Commission at all the stages of examination in favour of persons with Benchmark Disabilities in order to fill up the vacancies reserved for them.
Provided that where candidates belonging to Person with Benchmark Disability obtain the minimum qualifying marks in own merit in the requisite number for General, or the Scheduled Caste or the Scheduled Tribe or the Other Backward Class or the Economically Weaker Sections category candidates, then, the extra Candidates belonging to Persons with Benchmark Disability, i.e., more than the number of vacancies reserved for them shall be recommended by the Commission on the relaxed standards and consequential amendments in the rules will be notified in due course.
16. The form and manner of communication of the result of the examination to individual candidates shall be decided by the Commission at their discretion and the Commission will not enter into correspondence with them regarding the result.
17. Success in the examination confers no right to allocation & appointment unless Government is satisfied after such enquiry as may be considered necessary that the candidate, having regard to his/her character and antecedents and certificates produced by him/her during the course of examination for the purpose of eligibility as well as claiming any kind of benefit for reservation is suitable in all respects including medical examination for allocation/appointment to the Service. The decision of the Government in this regard shall be final.
18. A candidate must be in good mental and bodily health and free from any physical defect likely to interfere with the discharge of his/her duties as an Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 15 OA.No.760/2022 officer of the service. A candidate who after such medical examination as Government or the appointing authority, as the case may be may prescribed, is found not to satisfy these requirements, will not be appointed. Any candidate called for the Personality Test by the Commission may be required to undergo Part I of the medical examination and the candidates who are declared finally successful on the basis of this examination, may be required to undergo Part II of the medical examination. The details of Parts I and II of the medical examination are given in the Appendix III to these Rules. No fee shall be payable to the Medical Board by the candidate for the medical examination except in the case of appeal. The standard for Transgender candidates would be posted on the dedicated Web-page of the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs / the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation before commencement of the Medical Examination of Indian Economic Service/Indian Statistical Service Examination, 2021.
Note.--In order to prevent disappointment, candidates are advised to have themselves examined by a Government Medical Officer of the standing of a Civil Surgeon before applying for admission to the examination. Particulars of the nature of medical test to which candidates will be subjected before appointment and of the standards required are given in Appendix III to these Rules. For the disabled ExDefence Service personnel the standards will be relaxed consistent with the requirements of the Services.
(emphasis added)
19. The eligibility for availing reservation against the vacancies reserved for the persons with benchmark disability shall be the same as prescribed in "The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016": The candidates of Multiple Disabilities will be eligible for reservation under category (e) Multiple Disabilities only of Section 34(1) of RPwD Act, 2016 and shall not be eligible for reservation under any other categories of disabilities i.e. (a) to
(d) of Section 34(1) of RPwD Act, 2016 on account of having 40% and above impairment in any of these categories of PwBD.
Provided further that the persons with benchmark disability shall also be required to meet special eligibility criteria in terms of physical requirements/functional classification (abilities/disabilities) consistent with requirements of the identified service/ post as may be prescribed by its cadre controlling authority as per Appendix IV."
APPENDIX-III REGULATIONS RELATING TO THE PHYSICAL EXAMINATION OF CANDIDATES
1. These regulations are published for the convenience of candidates and to enable them to ascertain the probability of their being of the required physical standard. The regulations are also intended to provide guidelines to the medical examiners. All kinds of notices and information relating to the medical examination of the Transgender Candidates including the medical parameters for Transgender candidates would be posted on the dedicated web page of the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs and the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation before the commencement of the medical examination of IES/ISS Exam, 2021.
Note.--"The Medical Board while conducting medical examination of the candidates who have applied against the posts reserved for persons with Benchmark Disability will keep the relevant provisions of the Rights of Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 16 OA.No.760/2022 Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 wherein the extent of permissible physical disability has been defined.
2. (a)The Government of India reserve to themselves absolute discretion to reject or accept any candidate after considering the report of the Medical Board.
(b) The medical examination shall be conducted in two parts, i.e. Part I which shall consist of the entire medical examination which the medical board may prescribe for a candidate except the Radiographic Examination of the chest (X-ray test) and Part II which shall consist of Radiographic Examination (X-ray test of the chest). The Part II shall be conducted only in respect of the candidates who have been declared finally successful on the basis of the examination.]
1. To be passed as fit for appointment a candidate must be in good mental and bodily health and free from any physical defect likely to interfere with the efficient performance of the duties of his/her appointment."
x x x "13. The candidate filing an appeal against the decision of the Medical Board has to deposit an appeal fee of Rs.50 in such manner as may be prescribed by the Government of India in this behalf. This fee would be refunded if the candidate is declared fit by the Appellate Medical Board. The candidates may, if they like, enclose medical certificate in support of their claim of being fit. Appeal should be submitted within 21 days of the date of the communication in which the decision of the Medical Board is communicated to the candidates; otherwise, request for second medical examination by an Appellate Medical Board will not be entertained. The medical examination by the Appellate Medical Board would be arranged at New Delhi only and no travelling allowance or daily allowance will be admissible to the journey performed in connection with the medical examination. Necessary action to arrange medical examination by Appellate Medical Board would be taken by the Ministry of Finance, Deptt. of Economic Affairs or the M/o Statistics and Programme Implementation as the case may be; on receipt of appeals accompanied by the prescribed fee." (emphasis added) Medical Board's Report The following intimation is made for the guidance of the Medical Examiner :--
The standard of physical fitness to be adopted should make due allowance for the age and length of service, if any of the candidate concerned.
x x x The Board should normally consist of three members : (i) a Physician,
(ii) a Surgeon and (iii) an Opthalmologist all of whom should as far as practicable be of equal status. A lady doctor will be co-opted as a member of the Medical Board whenever a woman candidate is to be examined.
Candidates appointed to the Indian Economic Service/Indian Statistical Service are liable for field service in or out of India. In case of such a candidate the Medical Board should specifically record their opinion as Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 17 OA.No.760/2022 to his/her fitness or otherwise for field service. The report of the Medical Board should be treated as confidential.
In case where a candidate is declared unfit for appointment in the Government service, the grounds for rejection may be communicated to the candidate in broad terms without giving minute details regarding the defects pointed out by the Medical Board. In case where a Medical Board considers that a minor disability disqualifying a candidate for Government service can be cured by treatment, (medical or surgical) a statement to that effect should be recorded by the Medical Board. There is no objection to a candidate being informed of the Board's opinion to this effect by the appointing authority and when a cure has been affected it will be open to the authority concerned to ask for another Medical Board." (emphasis added)
8. The following Sections of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, are also important, in the present context -
"2 (r) "person with benchmark disability" means a person with not less than forty per cent of a specified disability where specified disability has not been defined in measurable terms and includes a person with disability where specified disability has been defined in measurable terms, as certified by the certifying authority."
x x x "2 (zc) "specified disability" means the disabilities as specified in the Schedule."
THE SCHEDULE [See clause (zc) of section 2] SPECIFIED DISABILITY
1. Physical disability.--
x x x "C. Hearing impairment-- (a) "deaf" means persons having 70 DB hearing loss in speech frequencies in both ears;"
"(b) "hard of hearing" means person having 60 DB to 70 DB hearing loss in speech frequencies in both ears;"
9. It is worth noting that the ISS Exam Rules, 2021, carry a provision for getting medical examination done, in advance, as highlighted at the Note under Rule 18 above. The applicant herein had got her medical examination done, which confirmed her disability above 40%, prior to the medical examination done as part of the recruitment process, leading to her rejection. As her earlier recruitment in Group-B was the result of her benchmark disability for being Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 18 OA.No.760/2022 hearing impaired, the reports under medical examination and medical re- examination, for the Group-A post, putting her below the 40% disability mark, are challenged in the OA. While submitting an appeal against the decision of the Medical Board, as per Rule-13 of the ISS Exam Rules, 2021, "the candidates may, if they like, enclose medical certificate in support of their claim of being fit." Certain other important provisions under the heading Medical Board's Report have been highlighted / emphasised above. According to these provisions, "A lady doctor will be co-opted as a member of the Medical Board whenever a woman candidate is to be examined". Further, "the Medical Board should specifically record their opinion as to his/her fitness or otherwise for field service."
10. In the Report, dt.21.12.2021, of the Medical Superintendent, Safdarjang Hospital & VMMC, New Delhi, against the name of B.Aruna (PH candidate), Roll No.1080268, in the Column 'FIT/UNFIT', the following is recorded -
"Due to non-availability of Speech therapist & Audiologist, Final decision cannot be given."
Her case was then referred by the department to the Central Standing Medical Board (CSMB), Lady Hardinge Medical College, New Delhi, which found the applicant to be suffering from 18.6% hearing loss, vide the report, dt.06.04.2022, and declared her fit and advised the department to decide whether the candidate was eligible or not. On the basis of the report of Lady Hardinge Medical College, the applicant was informed, vide letter, dt.19.04.2022, of the Dy.Director (ISS) that she was declared 'Unfit' for appointment into ISS, against the Physically Handicapped (PH) category. She Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 19 OA.No.760/2022 was also informed that she had the option of appeal against the decision of the CSMB, LHMC, N.Delhi.
11. The applicant made her representation, dt.27.04.2022, against the decision of the CSMB, Lady Hardinge Medical College, by annexing the report, dt.27.04.2022, of the Govt. ENT Hospital, Hyderabad, which put her percentage of disability at 61%. Thereafter, on 04.05.2022, her case was referred to the Chairman, Central Standing Medical Board (CSMB), Dr.R.M.L.Hospital, New Delhi, for re-medical examination, on the basis of her appeal. As per report, dt.09.06.2022, of Dr.R.M.L.Hospital, New Delhi, the percentage of disability was found to be 08% (Eight percent). Accordingly, the UPSC was informed, vide letter, dt.05.07.2022, that Ms.B.Aruna is found 'Unfit', on account of less than 40% of the specified disability, for appointment into the Indian Statistical Service, against the vacancy reserved for PH category, and that her candidature has been cancelled. A copy of the same was marked to Ms.B.Aruna.
12. Significantly, the Govt.ENT Hospital, Hyderabad, has been consistently giving its findings that Ms.B.Aruna has been suffering from disability which has, apparently, risen from 46% on 24.04.2017 to 61% on 27.04.2022. Ali Yavar Jung National Institute of Speech and Hearing Disabilities (Divyangjan), found her to be suffering from 47.41% disability on 16.11.2015, which was almost the same as on 08.06.2022. According to the applicant, the Lady Hardinge Medical College declared, on 25.08.2022, when she approached them, separately, that she was suffering from 43.7% disability. She has also claimed that, one day prior to her OPD visit at the LHMC, the All India Institute of Medical Sciences Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 20 OA.No.760/2022 (AIIMS), New Delhi, had also declared that her disability was in the range of 64.5% to 67%.
13. This is a peculiar case where the applicant is a serving government servant who was selected for Group-B, in the Indian Statistical Service, as a candidate under the disability quota and has been serving as such. However, for the present recruitment into Group-A, in the same department, she is found to be unfit for selection under the disability quota. Further, this confusion becomes more confounded on account of contradictory reports regarding the percentage of benchmark disability of the candidate, by not only different institutions, but even by the same medical establishment, viz., Lady Hardinge Medical College, New Delhi. The applicant has presented the variations in the tests conducted by different hospitals, in a tabular form in the OA. It may be argued that if the candidates are allowed to get themselves examined and bring reports from different hospitals, individually, there cannot be a standardized medical screening of candidates for any recruitment process. While this argument has its merits, it becomes difficult to ignore the submission when divergent reports are prepared by the same institution, as seen in this case. Even under the ISS Exam Rules, 2021 above, there are provisions enabling the candidates to secure medical reports privately and submit the same along with their appeal, under Rule 13.
14. From the medical reports enclosed by the respondents, it is not clear whether the guidelines in the ISS Exam Rules, 2021, under the heading 'Medical Board's Report', have been followed, scrupulously, as the report, dt.09.06.2022, of Dr.R.M.L.Hospital, on Re-medical examination, is found to be quite bald. It Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 21 OA.No.760/2022 does not contain the signatures of three Members nor does it show that any lady doctor was co-opted as a Member of the Medical Board for examination of the applicant, being a woman candidate. Specific recommendation regarding fitness of the candidate is also missing. Thus, it is not in keeping with the guidelines under the Rules notified.
15. The applicant has relied upon the order, dt.22.08.2022, of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WP(C).572/2020. The matter therein pertained to visual disability of the Physically Challenged (PH) candidate/petitioner. However, the principles laid down are relevant to this case as well. The following portion of the judgment is extracted below-
"1. In the present case, the petitioner assails the report dated 21.02.2019 of the Appellate Medical Board of Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, New Delhi (Department of Ophthalmology), communicated to the Petitioner vide covering letter dated 08.03.2019, conducted in compliance of order dated 22.11.2018 of this Court whereby the Medical Board consisting of three senior doctors had concluded that the Petitioner was having visual disability of 20% only.
2. This is the second round of litigation for the Petitioner who had earlier assailed the order dated 27.09.2018 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') in O.A. 985/2016.
3. The Petitioner was a candidate for recruitment of All India Service for the year 2015. He made his application claiming reservation under the Visually Handicapped category. He was successful in the written examination and also participated in the interview on 05.05.2015. He states that he was sent for his medical examination by the Medical Board of the Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Hospital (LNJP). The facility in that behalf existed at Guru Nanak Eye Centre which is a part of the same establishment.
4. His medical examination was conducted on 03.07.2015 and the doctor certified the extent of his handicap as 20%. The minimum handicap required for a candidate to qualify as a handicapped category is 40% and, consequently, he was examined by the Appellate Board which too found his disability to be only to the extent of 20%. Consequently, the petitioner's candidature was cancelled by the DOP&T on 29.09.2015 and he, therefore, approached the Tribunal challenging the two medical reports dated 03.07.2015 and 21.07.2015 and the resultant order passed by the DOP&T dated 29.09.2015. Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 22 OA.No.760/2022
5. The Petitioner relied upon a certificate dated 26.02.2016 obtained by him upon his medical examination at All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), according to which his handicap was assessed at 75%. The Tribunal by judgment dated 27.09.2018 held that since the petitioner had been found to be disabled to the extent of 20% by the Medical Board and the Appellate Board, reliance could not be placed by the petitioner on a privately obtained medical report from the AIIMS.
Consequently, the Original Application was dismissed. Petitioner assailed the judgment of the Tribunal dated 27.09.2018 by W.P.(C) 12481/2018.
6. In the earlier WP (C) No.12481/2018, this Court by order dated 22.11.2018 has in paras 6, 7 and 8 passed the following directions :-
"6. The notice issued by the DOP&T dated 12.02.2018 in respect of Civil Services examination 2017 deals with the procedure to be followed for the purpose of medical examination of the candidates. Though strictly speaking, this procedure may not be attracted in case of the examination in question which is the CSE 2014, considering the nature of controversy raised - which relates to the extent of the petitioner's disability, we are of the view that the procedure prescribed in Rule 17 of the aforesaid procedure in relation to CSE 2017 could be invoked to resolve the controversy fairly so that, in case, the petitioner is indeed suffering from visual impairment in excess of 40 per cent, he is not unduly denied appointment despite his being found to be meritorious otherwise, as a disabled candidate. Rule 17 provides that when the dispute relates to the extent of disability, the matter would be assessed by AIMS, Delhi by a team of doctors consisting of different specialists / doctors other than those involved in the initial assessment as far as possible. The findings of the AIMS team are then communicated to the Appellate Medical Board concerned. On the basis of the said findings, the Appellate Medical Board would form its final opinion. The said Rule reads as follows:
"In case of PH candidates, after filing of appeal by any PH candidate within the stipulated period as per CSE Rules, the appellate medical examination of the candidate would be scheduled in any hospital other than Safdarjung Hospital. In the cases where appeal is filed by PH candidates, in respect of the percentage of disability provided by the CSMB; the Appellate Medical Board (AMB) would further refer the candidates to AlIMS, Delhi for test(s) related to assessment of the disability and would provide its opinion on the bais of the test (s) report provided by AIIMS, Delhi. AlIMS, Delhi will set up a team of doctors consisting of different specialist / doctors other than those involved in initial assessment as far as possible. The findings of this team of AIIMS regarding disability assessment will be communicated to the Appellate Medical Board (AMB) concerned. The AMB's findings would be treated as final.
No application for re-appeal would be considered."
7. Considering the aforesaid, we dispose of this petition with the direction that the petitioner's case be re-examined by a Board of doctors at AIMS, Delhi in accordance with Rule 17 aforesaid. The examination should take place de hors the report prepared by AIMS at the instance of the petitioner earlier. The said report shall not be looked at by the Board and the petitioner's case should be examined by a different set of doctors and technicians as far as possible. The report prepared by the AIMS, Delhi should then be communicated to the Appellate Medical Board of the Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 23 OA.No.760/2022 respondent in a sealed cover who shall then proceed to take the final call in the matter.
8. This order be communicated to the Medical Superintendent, AIIMS for compliance. The Board shall be constituted by the Medical Superintendent, AIIMS and the examination shall be got conducted within next 3 weeks."
16. In the present case, we find that the report, dt.06.04.2022, of Lady Hardinge Medical College, is contradicted by its own subsequent report, dt.25.08.2022, and also that the report, dt.27.05.2022, of Dr.R.M.L.Hospital, is not in keeping with the guidelines under the notified Rules. Therefore, none of these reports can be accepted in the present case. Further, the report of the Govt. ENT Hospital, dt.04.12.2024, furnished by the Counsel for the applicant has put the physical impairment of the applicant at 46%.
17. It is also noted that, in the letter, dt.16.08.2023, written by the Chairman, CSMB, Dr, RML Hospital, New Delhi, to the Sr.Central Govt. Standing Counsel, appearing before us on behalf of the respondents, it has been stated that -
'....the records pertaining to the medical examination of B.Aruna are not available/traceable in Central Standing Medical Board/ENT Department of Dr.Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, New Delhi.'
18. In view of the above discussion, we feel that an objective medical examination of the applicant is required to be carried out by a Medical Board to be constituted by the Superintendent, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, following the guidelines for medical re-examination, in the Rules, notified on 07.04.2021, as well as the directions issued by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WP(C).572/2020 (supra). The impugned orders, dt.19.04.2022 and 05.07.2022, are quashed and set aside. Fresh assessment of the disability of the applicant shall be conducted and the resultant Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 24 OA.No.760/2022 outcome communicated to her. Any further action called for shall be taken in the light of the findings of the Medical Board of AIIMS, New Delhi, to be constituted, as above. The entire process shall be completed within a period of three (3) months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till then, the interim order, dt.06.06.2023, shall continue.
19. The OA is disposed of with the above directions. No order as to costs.
(Varun Sindhu Kul Kaumudi) (Dr. Lata Baswaraj Patne)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
09.09.2025
/ps/
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
PANDIRLAP DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode= 500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cfaa0 ALLI a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4181 3a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.09.11 17:29:16+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0