Madras High Court
Minor K.T.Srivatsan vs The Sainik Schools Society on 20 July, 2022
Author: Abdul Quddhose
Bench: Abdul Quddhose
W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 12.07.2022
PRONOUNCED ON : 20.07.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P.Nos.12512, 10134, 10137, 10141, 10145, 10131, 10120, 10122, 10151,
10110 & 10126 of 2022
and
Connected Miscellaneous Petitions
Minor K.T.Srivatsan
Represented by his mother and next friend,
T.Bhavithra .. Petitioner in WP.No.12512 of 2022
Minor K.Jaanav,
Represented by his Father and Natural Guardian,
K.Krishnakumar .. Petitioner in W.P.No.10134 of 2022
Minor S.Nithin Karthik
Represented by his Father and Natural Guardian,
G.Sivaprakasan .. Petitioner in WP.No.10137 of 2022
Minor A.Sabareesh,
Represented by his Father and Natural Guardian,
R.Arumugam .. Petitioner in W.P.No.10141 of 2022
Minor V.Vikas,
Represented by Father and Natural Guardian,
N.Vadivel .. Petitioner in W.P.No.10145 of 2022
Minor E.Sudan,
Represented by his Father and Natural Guardian,
K.Elamvaluthy .. Petitioner in W.P.No.10131 of 2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/22
W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch)
Minor Thambivalavan.K
Represented by Father and Natural Guardian,
A.Kannan .. Petitioner in W.P.No.10120 of 2022
Minor Rahul Palanisamy,
Represented by his Father and Natural Guardian,
T.Palanisamy .. Petitioner in W.P.No.10122 of 2022
Minor V.G.Vishrudh,
Represented by Mother and Natural Guardian,
S.Santhi .. Petitioner in W.P.No.10151 of 2022
Minor S.Yuvan,
Represented by his Father and Natural Guardian,
P.Stalin .. Petitioner in W.P.No.10110 of 2022
Minor Siddharth N.S.,
Represented by his mother,
P.Sindhuja .. Petitioner in W.P.No.10126 of 2022
Versus
1.The Sainik Schools Society,
Represented by its Executive Chairman,
Room No.101, D-1 Wing, Sena Bhawan,
New Delhi – 110 011.
2.The Principal,
Sainik School, Amaravathinagar,
Udumalpet Taluk,
Tirupur District – 642 102 ... Respondents in all Wps.
Prayer in W.P.No.12512 of 2022: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Declaration declaring the
provisional 1st merit list dated 11.04.2022 published by the 2nd respondent in
their web site is null and void insofar as the non-inclusion of the petitioner Roll
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/22
W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch)
number 4103020363 due to the reason of “overweight” and consequently direct
the respondents herein to admit the petitioner in Class VI in the second
respondent School in OBC Category.
Prayer in W.P.No.10134 of 2022: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Declaration declaring the
provisional 1st merit list dated 11.04.2022 published by the 2nd respondent in
their web site is null and void insofar as the non-inclusion of the petitioner Roll
number 4103030106 due to the reason of “overweight” and consequently direct
the respondents herein to admit the petitioner in Class VI in the second
respondent School in OBC Category.
Prayer in W.P.No.10137 of 2022: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Declaration declaring the
provisional 1st merit list dated 11.04.2022 published by the 2nd respondent in
their web site is null and void insofar as the non-inclusion of the petitioner Roll
number 4103030418 due to the reason of overweight and consequently direct
the respondents herein to admit the petitioner in Class VI in the second
respondent School in OBC-NCL Category.
Prayer in W.P.No.10141 of 2022: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Declaration declaring the
provisional 1st merit list dated 11.04.2022 published by the 2nd respondent in
their web site is null and void insofar as the non-inclusion of the petitioner Roll
number 4103020462 due to the reason of overweight and consequently direct
the respondents herein to admit the petitioner in Class VI in the second
respondent School in OBC Category.
Prayer in W.P.No.10145 of 2022: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Declaration declaring the
provisional 1st merit list dated 11.04.2022 published by the 2nd respondent in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3/22
W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch)
their web site is null and void insofar as the non-inclusion of the petitioner Roll
number 4103020598 due to the reason of overweight and consequently direct
the respondents herein to admit the petitioner in Class VI in the second
respondent School in OBC-NCL (Central List).
Prayer in W.P.No.10131 of 2022: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Declaration declaring the
provisional 1st merit list dated 11.04.2022 published by the 2nd respondent in
their web site is null and void insofar as the non-inclusion of the petitioner Roll
number 4103010034 due to the reason of overweight and consequently direct
the respondents herein to admit the petitioner in Class VI in the second
respondent School in OBC Category.
Prayer in W.P.No.10120 of 2022: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Declaration declaring the
provisional 1st merit list dated 11.04.2022 published by the 2nd respondent in
their web site is null and void insofar as the non-inclusion of the petitioner Roll
number 4103010300 due to the reason of “overweight” and consequently direct
the respondents herein to admit the petitioner in Class VI in the second
respondent School under ST (Home) category.
Prayer in W.P.No.10122 of 2022: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Declaration declaring the
provisional 1st merit list dated 11.04.2022 published by the 2nd respondent in
their web site is null and void insofar as the non-inclusion of the petitioner Roll
number 4103030412 due to the reason of overweight and consequently direct
the respondents herein to admit the petitioner in Class VI in the second
respondent School in OBC Category.
Prayer in W.P.No.10151 of 2022: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Declaration declaring the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4/22
W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch)
provisional 1st merit list dated 11.04.2022 published by the 2nd respondent in
their web site is null and void insofar as the non-inclusion of the petitioner Roll
number 4103030250 due to the reason of overweight and consequently direct
the respondents herein to admit the petitioner in Class VI in the second
respondent School under ST (Home) category.
Prayer in W.P.No.10110 of 2022: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Declaration declaring the
provisional 1st merit list dated 11.04.2022 published by the 2nd respondent in
their web site is null and void insofar as the non-inclusion of the petitioner Roll
number 4103030117 due to the reason of overweight and consequently direct
the respondents herein to admit the petitioner in Class VI in the second
respondent School in Defence category.
Prayer in W.P.No.10126 of 2022: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Declaration declaring the
provisional 1st merit list dated 11.04.2022 published by the 2nd respondent in
their web site is null and void insofar as the non-inclusion of the petitioner Roll
number 4103020321 due to the reason of overweight and consequently direct
the respondents herein to admit the petitioner in Class VI in the second
respondent School under ST (Home) category.
For Petitioners
in all W.Ps. : Mr.K.Elango
For Respondents
in all W.Ps. : Mr.K.Subbu Ranga Bharathi,
Central Government Standing Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5/22
W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch)
COMMON ORDER
These writ petitions pertain to selection process of students in Sainik Schools. The respective petitioners in these writ petitions have applied for admission to Class-VI in the Sainik Schools. But according to them, they were denied admission despite being meritorious, purely on medical grounds i.e., for the reason that they were overweight and some of them in addition to being overweight, have phimosis. The appeals against the decision of the medical board namely, the Military Hospital, Chennai, declaring the petitioners as medically unfit for selection was also rejected by the Dean of Coimbatore Medical College Hospital, Coimbatore on 08.06.2022.
2. The respective petitioners have challenged the provisional selection list issued by the respondents excluding their names despite being meritorious, only on the ground that they were medically unfit due to overweight / phimosis. Sainik Schools are a system of schools in India established and managed by the Sainik Schools Society under Ministry of Defence (Mod). They were conceived in 1961 by V.K.Krishna Menon, the then Defence Minister of India, to rectify the regional and class imbalance amongst the Officer cadre of the Indian Military and to prepare students mentally and https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch) physically for entry into the National Defence Academy (NDA) and Indian Naval Academy (INA).
3. Ministry of Defence run Sainik Schools as joint venture with the respective State Governments. Ministry of Defence provides annual funding, and serving officers in the key roles i.e., Principal. State Governments provide the land, infrastructure and other teaching and administrative employees. Sainik Schools follow the “CBSE Plus” by using CBSE curriculum while additionally aiming to prepare the children for entering into Indian Defence Academy and Indian Naval Academy. Admission to Sainik Schools is granted from class VI. The reservation policy caters for SC/ST, domicile of the respective States and the wards of Armed Forces employees and ex-servicemen. Sainik schools are ordinary citizen's public school where deserving students get high-quality education irrespective of their income or class background. Seats are reserved for children of SC/ST and serving/retired defence personnel.
4. The objective of the Sainik Schools is to prepare the students to lead as officers in the Defence Services of the country. The schools select bright and promising students through All India Sainik School Entrance Examination (AISSEE) and focus on moulding their overall personality with emphasis on https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch) extracurricular activities. Sainik schools resources allow cadets to develop their skills in sports, academics and other extracurricular activities. Infrastructure in Sainik Schools include running tracks, cross-country tracks, indoor games, parade grounds, boxing rings, firing ranges, canoeing clubs, horse riding clubs, mountaineering clubs, trekking and hiking club, obstacles courses, football, hockey and cricket fields as well as volleyball and basketball courts. Cadets also become a part of NCC. A cadet who completes their 12th standard usually possess a NCC B certificate.
5. Cadets are assigned to houses. They are classified as sub-juniors, juniors and seniors respectively depending upon their class of study. Cadets compete in sports, physical training, academics, cross country, drill and various other competitions to win their house trophy.
6. The necessity for this Court to highlight the importance of Sainik Schools in its introdictory paragraphs is only for the purpose of emphasizing the fact as to how important it is for the prospective students to pass medical and fitness tests. Once they get admission in the Sainik School, they are trained to serve the Indian Army and Indian Navy which involves rigorous training and requires the highest standards of fitness.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 8/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch)
7. The respective petitioners have been declared medically unfit due to overweight and in some cases, in addition to being overweight, due to phimosis. The respective petitioners have challenged the impugned provisional first merit list published by the first respondent on 11.04.2022 excluding their names on the following grounds:
(a) The impugned communication of the second respondent citing reason of overweight for not selecting the respective petitioners is arbitrary, erroneous, baseless and unsustainable.
(b) The impugned communication of the second respondent is not in consonance with the first respondent's rules which clearly states that in view of the tender age of the boys, no standards of height, weight and chest measurement would be applicable at the time of admission.
(c) The second respondent has failed to see that the respective petitioners' condition is reversible as the physical activity in the school will work in favour of the reduction in weight.
(d) The second respondent has failed to take note of the fact that the respective petitioners have passed entrance examination and have qualified to get admission to the Sainik Schools.
(e) The respondents also failed to take note of the fact that in the last two years, the whole country was under lock down due to the Pandemic and https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 9/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch) even classes were conducted online and there were no physical activity for the children especially when the vaccine has not been open for the children.
(f) The second respondent having not clearly spelt out the standards of weight, should have given clear 42 days for the petitioners to appear before the review medical board as per the rules laid down. Hence, rejecting the respective petitioners admission on the ground of being “medically unfit”, vitiates the entire selection process.
(g) Even the IAP chart rules cannot be applied against the respective petitioners as the same was not spelt out by the respondents. The general public cannot be in the knowhow of the standards prescribed for the height and weight unless the second respondent indicates in the prospectus.
(h) The children of tender age are made to prepare for the entrance examination giving them hope of joining the prestigious Sainik School. Had the respondents clearly stated the weight standards, the respective petitioners would have prepared themselves to meet the criteria even in the pandemic situation.
8. Counter affidavits have been filed by the respondents, wherein they have stated as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 10/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch)
(a) They have followed the procedure as per the “Manual of Medical Examination and Medical Standards for entries into Army, Training Academies and Military Schools', promulgated by IHQ Ministry of Defence (Army) vide letter 76054/Policy/DGMS-5A dated 16.07.2019 and Sainik Schools Society letter dated 04.03.2022.
(b) The initial medical examination board reports were received by the second respondent school from Coimbatore Medical College Hospital on 28.03.2022 wherein 92 candidates were declared as “unfit” for various reasons.
Candidates declared unfit were informed on the same day i.e., on 28.03.2022 that they have been declared medically unfit by Coimbatore Medical College Hospital for the reason mentioned in the Medical Board proceedings. They were also intimated that if they wish to go for appeal against the medical report given by Coimbatore Medical College Hospital, they may submit a request along with a medical opinion from a competent medical authority countering the report. On receipt of the request from the parents who were interested in appearing for the Review Medical Board, the candidates were informed to report before Military Hospital, Chennai for review from 01.04.2022 to 08.04.2022.
(c) The medical board constituted at Coimbatore Medical College Hospital has declared the respective petitioners as unfit due to the reason of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 11/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch) being overweight and in some cases, in addition to being overweight, on the ground of having phimosis.
(d) The respective petitioners preferred appeal against the medical report and appeared for review medical examination before the Medical Board at Military Hospital, Chennai. According to the respondents, the respective petitioners contention that 42 days will have to be given for the respective petitioners, is not applicable for children seeking admission to Sainik Schools.
(e) As per Rule 15 of Manual on Medical Examination and Medical Standards for entries into Army, Training Academies and Military Schools, the school authority shall inform the candidates about the provision of the Appeal Medical Examination within the stipulated period as per prevailing regulations notified by the Sainik Schools Society and amended from time to time.
(f) The period of 42 days between the first medical examination and second medical review is only applicable to candidates undergoing medical examination for commissioning as Military Officers, Nursing Service and entry as Cadets in various Training Academies for Officers and Student Nurses as given in Rule 17. Rule 17 is not applicable to candidates seeking admission to Sainik Schools as no special medical board is constituted.
(g) Rule 54 of Manual on Medical Examination and Medical Standards for entries into Army, Training Academies and Military Schools, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 12/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch) 2016 makes it clear that the height and weight for school children below 17 years may be followed as per the latest guidelines of Indian Academy of Paediatrics (IAP) growth charts for height, weight and BMI for 05 years to 16 years old children. Hence, the standards of IAP growth chart should be followed by the respective petitioners.
(h) The respondents have clearly mentioned the rules and regulations for the medical examination in its Manual and in addition to the Manual through various correspondences made to parents/guardians of the children, the methodology to clarify queries have been given. In case of any doubt, the parents/guardians should have clarified the same from Sainik Schools and the same is also available in School Website.
(i) Rule 3.09 of Sainik Schools Society Rules and Regulation, 1997 quoted by the petitioners is no longer valid and it is false and incorrect to state that no prospectus has been published by the Sainik Schools Society.
9. Heard Mr.K.Elango, learned counsel for the respective petitioners and Mr.K.Subbu Ranga Bharathi, learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 13/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch)
10. Learned counsel for the respective petitioners reiterated the contents of the affidavits filed in support of these petitions in his submissions. He relied upon the following authorities in support of his submissions:
(a) A Division Bench Judgement of this Court in the case of Dr.M.Vennila vs. Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission reported in 2006 (3) CTC 449;
(b) A Single Bench decision of the Calcutta High Court dated 07.05.2013 passed in W.P.No.10649 (W) of 2013 in the case of Master Sairaaj Sarkar vs. The Union of India & Others.
Relying upon the aforementioned decisions, the learned counsel for the respective petitioners would submit that the requirement of notifications /informations brochure with regard to procedure for selection is mandatory and documents relied upon for the purpose of declaring a candidate as medically unfit will have to be supplied to the said candidate. According to him, the respondents have not followed the said procedure and therefore, the respective petitioners must be given one more opportunity by the respondents to prove their medical fitness.
11. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents has filed before this Court, the report of the Military Hospital, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 14/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch) Chennai declaring the respective petitioners as unfit on account of being overweight and in some cases, in addition to being overweight, having phimosis. The Body Mass Index (BMI) chart 2015 and other parameters taken into consideration for declaring the respective petitioners as medically unfit has also been placed on record before this Court. According to him, as seen from the reports, the respective petitioners are overweight ranging between 3 kgs to 11 kgs and in case of minor Rahul Palanisamy, the petitioner in W.P.No.10122 of 2022, he has been declared medically unfit as he is having phimosis, in addition to overweight. The Military Hospital, Chennai has also submitted its report which is the appeal preferred by the respective petitioners and has also confirmed that all the petitioners are overweight and in one case, namely minor Rahul Palanisamy, he is overweight and also having phimosis.
12. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents places reliance upon the following decisions of this Court involving the very same issue pertaining to admission of students in Sainik Schools:
(a) A Single Bench decision of this Court dated 05.07.2019 in W.P.No.13757 of 2019 etc., (batch) in the case of Minor J.Arun Prakash vs. The Secretary to Government of India and others.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 15/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch)
(b) A Single Bench Decision of this court dated 07.07.2017 passed in W.P.No.13737 of 2017 in the case of S.K.Logesh Kumar vs. The Principal, Sainik School and another.
(c) A Division Bench Decision of this court dated 22.09.2017 passed in W.A.No.1060 of 2017 in the case of S.K.Logesh Kumar vs. The Principal, Sainik School and another.
Relying upon the aforementioned decisions, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that when an expert body has found that the respective petitioners are medically unfit, the Court cannot sit upon the expert opinion as an appellate body.
Discussion:
13. Sainik Schools train students to enter into Indian Army or Indian Navy. Any person joining Indian Army or Indian Navy have to be medically fit as his/her duty requires service in difficult terrains and situations. A student joining a regular school cannot be compared to a student joining Sainik Schools or any other Military School. The training schedule for the students studying in Sainik Schools is very tough and only students who have the aptitude to serve in the Indian Army and in the Indian Navy and who have the capacity to accept the rigours of tough training, will be in a position to study in the said school. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 16/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch) Therefore, medical fitness is paramount for any student who wishes to join a Sainik School.
14. In the case on hand, the Military Hospital at Chennai as well as the dean of Coimbatore Medical College Hospital in their respective reports have confirmed that the respective petitioners are overweight. In fact, in the report of the Military Hospital, Chennai, the respective petitioners are overweight in the range between 3 kgs to 11 kgs. The Military Hospital, Chennai has given full particulars of the medical examination of the respective petitioners with regard to their weight. The Body Mass Index (BMI) of the respective petitioners have also been disclosed in the said report. Insofar as the petitioner in W.P.No.10122 of 2022 namely Minor Rahul Palanisamy is concerned, he has been declared as medically unfit by Military Hospital, Chennai not only on the ground of overweight but also on the ground that he is having Phimosis. The Coimbatore Medical College Hospital has also confirmed that the petitioners are overweight including the Minor Rahul Palanisamy, apart from that he is having Phimosis.
15. When the medical experts have submitted their reports declaring the respective petitioners as overweight which is also supported by convincing https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 17/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch) evidence, this Court while exercising judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India does not have the power to set aside the reports of the medical experts as it is not an expert in the said field and cannot sit on appeal over the reports of the medical experts.
16. The decisions relied upon by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents involving the very same issue where this Court had rejected the students request for review of medical report on the ground that when medical experts have given an opinion which is supported by evidence, the question of judicial review by court will not arise as the Court is not an expert body on the said field.
17. This Court is in agreement with the view taken by the respective Hon'ble Judges in the decisions relied upon by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
18. The respondents have also contended that the Manual relied upon by them for the purpose of procedure was followed before declaring the petitioners as medically unfit is very well known to the parents of the petitioners as it is available in the respondents website. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 18/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch)
19. The Division Bench Judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the case of Dr.Vennila vs. Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission reported in 2006 (3) CTC 449 does not relate to Sainik School admission but relates to recruitment for the post of Assistant Surgeon through the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission. The decision is dated 12.06.2006, when the website for TNPSC was not available and every applicant will have to rely upon only physical copies of the prospectus. But in the instant case, Sainik Schools have their own website giving full particulars of the selection process and if at all the petitioners require any further clarification, their parents could have very well contacted the concerned Sainik School and obtained clarification. Having not done so, they cannot now blame the respondents for not issuing prospectus to the applicants. Insofar as the second decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the respective petitioners namely a decision of Calcutta High Court dated 07.05.2013 passed in W.P.No.10649(W) of 2013 in the case of Master Sairaaj Sarkar vs. The Union of Indian and others is concerned, though it relates to Sainik School admission, the said decision is also not applicable to the present case in view of the fact that in the said case, a student had filed an appeal as against the order declaring him as medically unfit by filing separate documents which were not considered and only in those circumstances, a reconsideration was ordered by the Calcutta High Court by https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 19/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch) giving due consideration to the supporting documents. In the case on hand, the respective petitioners have not denied that they were overweight at the time of their medical examination by Coimbatore Medical College Hospital as well as by the Military Hospital, Chennai. Their only contention is that they were unaware of the weight stipulations as no prospectus was issued.
20. For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in these writ petitions. Accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
21. Before parting with this case, I appreciate the petitioners and their parent's perseverance to secure seats in the Sainik School with the object of the petitioners either to serve the Indian Army or Indian Navy. Even though these writ petitions are dismissed, the petitioners should not get disappointed as experience shows that failures are the stepping stones to success. I wish them success in all their future endeavours.
20.07.2022 nl Index: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 20/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch) To
1.The Sainik Schools Society, Represented by its Executive Chairman, Room No.101, D-1 Wing, Sena Bhawan, New Delhi – 110 011.
2.The Principal, Sainik School, Amaravathinagar, Udumalpet Taluk, Tirupur District – 642 102 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 21/22 W.P.No.12512 of 2022 etc. (batch) ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
nl W.P.No.12512 of 2022, etc. (batch) 20.07.2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 22/22