Karnataka High Court
Sri Rahul R Koravi S/O Raju K vs The General Manager on 21 June, 2022
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO.101973/2022 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI RAHUL R KORAVI
S/O RAJU K
AGE. 20 YEARS,
R/O. G-1, EBENZER APARTMENT,
NEAR KERALA SAMAJ
PRAKASH COLONY
GADAG ROAD, HUBBALLI
DIST. DHARWAD-580020
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI : RAVI HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE GENERAL MANAGER
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY
HUBBALLI
DIST. DHARWAD-580023
2. THE CHAIRMAN
RAILWAY RECRUITMENT COMMITTEE (R.R.C)
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY
HUBBALLI
DIST. DHARWAD-580023
3. THE WORKSHOP PERSONNEL OFFICER/
CHIEF WORKSHOP MANAGER/ UBLS,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY WORK SHOP,
2
HUBBALLI
DIST. DHARWAD-580023
RESPONDENTS
(By Sri M.B.KANAVI, ADVCATE)
***
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED PRAYING TO:
A. ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR
ORDER QUASHING THE ORDER/COMMUNICATION DATED
13.05.2022 IN NO. L/P.924/ACT-APP-2018/VOL.XXXV,
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT REJECTING THE
CANDIDATURE OF THE PETITIONER AS MEDICALLY UNFIT
VIDE ANNEXURE-K;
B. CONSEQUENT UPON QUASHING THE AFORE SAID
ORDER, ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE
RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE
PETITIONER FOR SELECTION FOR APPRENTICESHIP IN
REFRIGERATION AND AIR CONDITIONER MECHANIC
TRADE BASED ON THE REVISED/ FRESH MEDICAL
CERTIFICATE AND LETTER ISSUED BY THE MEDICAL
OFFICER VIDE ANNEXURES-L AND M DATED 8/4/2022
AND 16/5/2022 RESPECTIVELY;
C. ISSUE ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER AS THIS HON BLE
COURT MAY DEEM FIT IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE
INCLUDING THE COST OF THIS PROCEEDING.
3
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard Sri Ravi Hegde, learned counsel for petitioner as well as Sri M.B. Kanavi, learned counsel for respondents.
2. The petitioner is stated to have completed his SSLC and he had also done his ITI with more than 73% marks. He belongs to SC community.
3. The respondents have issued notification calling for engagement of Apprentice under Apprentice Act, 1961 for the year 2021-2022 for Refrigeration and Air Conditioner Mechanic Trade. Totally there were 16 posts and out of which two posts were reserved for SC, one for ST, four for OBC and rest were unreserved.
4. Petitioner was fully qualified for getting the said training and has applied online as per the conditions stipulated in the notification. Petitioner submitted all the records and they were verified by the 4 respondents. Petitioner was also required to submit medical certificate from the Resident Medical Officer as per the format in the notification.
5. It is submitted that since petitioner was just SSLC qualified he was unable to understand the requirements and medical terminologies as required in the format for filling up in the medical form. The Resident Medical Officer after verifying the petitioner issued a certificate by himself putting tick mark to the columns.
6. However, on enquiry by the respondents, petitioner was shocked to see the e-mail issued by the respondents rejecting his candidature for Apprenticeship on 07.04.2022 on medical grounds that he is medically unfit.
7. Petitioner made immediate enquiry and he came to know that Resident Medical Officer, who filled the medical certificate, has wrongly filled the same by over sight. Thereafter he approached Resident Medical 5 Officer, who issued a fresh certificate and also a letter accepting his mistake.
8. Based on the fresh certificate and acceptance of the mistake by the Resident Medical Officer, petitioner approached the respondents and gave a certificate to them for reconsideration of his case for Apprenticeship.
9. Despite making various efforts there was no response from the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for Apprenticeship. Hence, left with no other alternative he filed a petition before this Court in W.P No.101498 of 2022. The said writ petition came to be allowed on 20.04.2022 and quashed the impugned rejection of the candidature of the petitioner on the basis of the medical certificate issued wrongly by the Resident Medical Officer, as it was not the fault of petitioner.
10. Petitioner once again approached the respondents on the basis of the afore stated orders of 6 this Court for reconsideration of his application for Apprenticeship.
11. However, on reconsideration, the respondents have once again rejected the candidature of the petitioner on the ground that he was not medically fit in B-1 Medical qualification and endorsement to that effect was issued on 13.05.2022 as per Annexure-K.
12. Pursuant to which again petitioner approached Resident Medical Officer and asked him about the same. He gracefully accepted that he was in a hurry when he marked column prescribed in the format and to correct his mistake he once again issued one more certificate and forwarded the same to the respondents. The said certificate issued by the Resident Medical Officer is produced at Annexure-L dated 08.04.2022. Thereafter, he has issued one more certificate on 16.05.2022, wherein Resident Medical Officer has stated that the petitioner is medically fit in all aspects for trade apprentice and that he is fit for C-1 7 and B-1 medically and that by oversight, he has wrongly issued a medical certificate on 08.04.2022, which reads as under;
"To whomsoever it may concern I, Dr.C.D.Kalasagoudar, Resident Medical Officer, District Hospital, Dharwad do hereby certify that Mr.Rahul Koravi is medically fit and all aspects are Trade apprentice in railways.
Further I would also certify that he is fit for both C1 and B1 medically.
By oversight medical certificate issued on 08.04.2022 has been wrongly issued in B1 Category. Corrected medical certificate is attached herewith for reference.
Incontinence regretted."
13. It is seen that pursuant to the rejection of petitioner vide annexure-K dated 13.5.2022, the Resident Medical Officer has issued a medical certificate dated 16.5.2022 stating that the petitioner is fit for both C-1 and B-1 medically. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the entire mistake and 8 error has arisen due to the mistake committed by the Resident Medical Officer in filling the certificate, which is in a format and it is accepted by the Resident Medical Officer that the said format has been filled by him and tick mark has been put by him. Therefore, as per the order passed by this Court in earlier W.P.No.101498/2022, it would have to be reiterated again by this Court that the petitioner was never at fault in filling the required medical certificate or format of filing the forms required for apprentice. In view of the certificate issued by the Resident Medical Officer admitting his mistake that he has wrongly issued the medical certificate and filled the forms by mistake, it is to be clearly inferred that the mistake in filling up the form on the certificate is due to the error committed by the Resident Medical Officer and not due to any error of the petitioner. However, the application of petitioner has been rejected as not being fit in medical classification B-1 for refrigeration and air conditioner mechanic. 9
14. Learned Senior panel counsel Mr.Kanavi appearing on behalf of respondents has filed detailed statement of objections and he contends that there is something seriously wrong with the present form/certificate produced by the petitioner as despite the orders passed by this Court in previous writ petition and having provided an opportunity to the petitioner to get rectification of the medical certificate, an error is committed irresponsibly once again in filing up the forms by the medical officer.
15. It is also contended by learned counsel for the respondents that pursuant to the rejection of petitioner due to being medically unfit for B-1 classification, the doctor has issued a certificate on 16.5.2022, wherein he has stated that the petitioner is fit for both B-1 and C-1, which does not auger well with a Resident Medical Officer, as he has no authority to say whether the petitioner is fit for B-1 or C-1 classification. It was his duty only to issue medical certificate and it is the respondent, who has to consider for which 10 classification he is fit and for which he is unfit. The post for which the petitioner has applied is for engagement in apprentice for refrigeration and air conditioner mechanic. The process of selection is not yet over, it is in the mid way and is not completed yet.
16. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in earlier round of litigation, it was directed to the respondents to consider the application of petitioner on furnishing proper certificate. Accordingly, the petitioner with good intention and bonafide believe that the Resident Medical Officer, who is a qualified person in this field of knowledge, would do right thing by filing up the form correctly without committing any error approached the Resident Medical Officer, who instead of filing up the forms correctly once again committed an error in filing up the forms thereby, causing an error in the medical certificate leading to the rejection of candidature of petitioner.
11
17. It is apparent on the face on record, on perusal of the annexures furnished by the petitioner and so also the admission and acceptance by the Resident Medical Officer that, an error is on the part of Resident Medical Officer; this Court will have to keep in mind the said facts; to say least the petitioner being a SSLC qualified person believed and depended on the correct filing up of the form by the Resident Medical Officer, which was messed up by wrongly filing up the forms not once but twice and top to it all issues medical certificate to correct his error by further committing an error. Such issuance of medical certificate and wrongly filing up of the form by Resident Medical Officer is deprecated by this Court, which lead to the rejection of candidature of petitioner.
18. In view the above facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the rejection of candidature of petitioner is not due to error in capacity or deficiency of the petitioner to be qualified for being appointed or selected in the said post. It is due to the 12 incorrect medical form and certificate filled by the Resident Medical Officer, which cannot be attributed to the petitioner. Accordingly, I am of the opinion that the petitioner deserves one more chance to be provided to secure a proper certificate from a qualified Resident Medical Officer and after obtaining the same to place it before the respondents for consideration.
19. It is very unfortunate to note that the Resident Medical Officer from Dharwad District hospital, Dharwad, appointed by Government of Karnataka for the said post has issued such certificate recklessly and irresponsibly without keeping in mind the fate of the petitioner and his future. I am of the opinion that the said Resident Medical Officer should be notified of this order and he should tender an apology in writing to this Court, which shall be placed before the Registrar General and same to be submitted to this Court and place it in the file on record. Accordingly, I pass the following;
13
ORDER Writ petition is allowed.
2. The order dated 13.5.2022 in No.L/P.924/Act-Application-2018/Vol.XXXV, issued by the 3rd respondent rejecting the candidature of petitioner as medically unfit vide annexure-k is hereby quashed.
3. The petitioner is permitted to obtain a fresh medical certificate as per the Railway Service apprentice under medical category B-1 and C-1 preferably from Karnataka Institution of Medical Service, Hubballi (KIMS) and place it before the respondents for consideration of his application.
4. On said medical certificate being placed by the petitioner after obtaining it from afore stated authority, the respondents shall consider the same and pass suitable orders. The petitioner shall obtain the medical certificate from afore stated Karnataka Institution of Medical Service, Hubballi within a period of 14 two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, which shall be placed before the respondents and the same shall be considered within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of said medical certificate.
5. Registry to communicate the order to the Resident Medical Officer of Dharwad Civil Hospital, Dharwad.
Sd/-
JUDGE Vk/am/-