Bombay High Court
Radhakishan Baburao Pawar vs The Union Of India And Others on 14 January, 2026
2026:BHC-AUG:1900-DB
..1.. 915-wp-6141-16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
915 WRIT PETITION NO. 6141 OF 2016
RADHAKISHAN BABURAO PAWAR
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Bhosale Sanjaykumar B. DSGI for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 : Mr.Talhar Ajay G. AGP for Respondent No.3/State : Mr. S. P. Joshi ...
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT,
SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.J.
DATE : 14.01.2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner, learned DSGI for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and learned AGP for Respondent No.3/State.
2. The petitioner was selected to the post of Specialist-Grade-II (Junior Scale) with the department of Public Health Services and in the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (CHS Division) after following due process. The petitioner was thereafter directed by letter dated 23.12.2015 to appear for medical examination. However, for the reasons stated in the application, by letter dated 22.8.2014, he did not appear for the medical test. Thereafter again reminders were given by ..2.. 915-wp-6141-16 letters dated 27.04.2015 and 21.08.2015. However, still the petitioner did not appear for medical examination before the board for getting medically examined. The respondent authority therefore cancelled the appointment of the petitioner by communication dated 23.12.2015. It is only thereafter the petitioner made representation after about five months. The petitioner made representation on 15.05.2016 stating that he was already medically examined by the Swami Ramanand Teerth Rural Government Medical College and Hospital, Ambajogai, Dist. Beed. On 27.06.2012, he was under impression that he need not appear for the examination. He also prays that the letter of cancellation of appointment be withdrawn and he be allowed to join the services. The respondents, however did not consider his representation and, therefore, the petition is filed.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he was ready and willing to join services and, therefore, he had appeared for the selection process. Since he was medically examined earlier in 2012, he was under
bonafide belief that he need not appear for the medical examination again before joining the post. He submits that even now the petitioner is ready to get himself medically examined before joining the post. The learned Advocate has prayed that the petition needs to be allowed by ..3.. 915-wp-6141-16 quashing and setting aside the communication dated 23.12.2015 cancelling the appointment. He further prayed that necessary directions be issued to respondent No.3 for making necessary arrangements for fresh medical examination of the petitioner, if required.
4. The petition is vehemently opposed by the learned DSGI Shri Talhar. He submits that the petitioner was repeatedly reminded to appear for the medical examination. However, in spite of repeated reminders, he failed to appear before the Medical Board. The post could not be filled in view of the interim relief granted by this Court by order dated 01.08.2016. From the affidavit in reply, he submits that since the petitioner did not join, the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) had further recommended the name of one Dr. Kapil Goel from the Reserve panel and he was offered appointment by communication dated 15.01.2016. However, he also could not join the post because of pendency of this petition and the orders passed therein.
5. This Court has heard the parties. The petitioner is already working as Deputy Director in the department of Health Services at Pune. It is thus expected of a person from the medical field who is ..4.. 915-wp-6141-16 working as Director to know the importance of the medical examination. However, still he avoided the medical examination for this reason only. The earlier examination certificate which is relied upon is of 2012. The petitioner could not point out that if there is already an earlier medical examination certificate, there is exemption from appearing for medical examination again even for fresh appointment. It is clear from the record that despite of repeated reminders for more than a year, the petitioner did not get himself medically examined. The reminders are on record. This conduct of the petitioner clearly shows that he has not at all responded and he was seeking appointment to such important post very casually. This Court granted interim relief by order dated 01.08.2006, even thereafter it is seen that petitioner did not even bother to join this post. Had the petitioner been really interested in prosecuting the petition and in joining the post, he would have certainly taken steps to get the petition listed. Hence this Court records that about for 10 years, the post is lying vacant because of the conduct of this petitioner. Even the respondents/Union did not move this Court, though one important post was vacant, for getting the stay vacated or for appropriate directions. This Court expects that even today the respondents are vigilant in getting the medical certificate in such circumstances.
..5.. 915-wp-6141-16
6. Considering the facts stated above, this Court finds that there is no merit in the petition, the petition deserves to be dismissed. The writ petition is hereby dismissed.
7. With this, writ petition stands disposed of.
(SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR) ( KISHORE C. SANT )
JUDGE JUDGE
shp/-