Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Raviranjan Kumar v. The Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7653 of 2020 ====================================================== Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Raviranjan Kumar S/o Shankar Prasad Resident of Village- Uttan Madanpur, P.S.- Jehanabad, District- Jehanabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India Through the Principal Secretary, Ministry of Home, New Delhi.

2.

The Staff Selection Commission Through its Secretary, 3.

The Chairman Staff Selection Commission, Central Region, 4.

The Director General of Police Central Reserve Police force, Block-7, Level- 14, Section-01, R.K. Puram, New Delhi. 5.

The Inspector General of Police Central Reserve Police force, Patna, Bihar. 6.

The Dy. Inspector General of Police Group Centre C.R.P.F, Mokamaghat, Patna, Bihar.

7.

The Medical Officer C.M.O. G.C., Central Reserve Police Force, Mokamaghat, Patna, Bihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vinod Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Dr. K.N. Singh ( ASG ) For the Union of India :

Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, CGC For the SSC :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, ASG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-02-2021 Heard Mr. Vinod Kumar learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel representing Union of India and Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, learned counsel appearing for the Staff Selection Commission.

2. The present writ application has been filed for quashing Annexure-3, which is an appellate order dated 23.03.2020 passed by Deputy Inspector General of Police, Group Centre, CRPF, Mokamaghat, whereby an appeal

2/4 preferred by the petitioner for Review Medical Exam for the post of Constable/GD, 2018 has been rejected on the ground that Medical Fitness Certificate of concerned field specialist was not attached by the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a provision in advertisement and guidelines for filing appeal for Review Medical Examination. According to the petitioner, he filed the appeal in a proper form including the required Medical Fitness Certificate issued by CMO, Jehanabad, but the appeal of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that medical fitness certificate of concerned field specialist has not been attached.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing for respondents submitted and agreed that a large number of cases have been disposed of by Coordinate Benches of this Court having identical facts and the leading case in that regard is CWJC No. 8370/2020, wherein this Court has directed the respondents to constitute a Review Medical Board for re-examination of the petitioner within a period of one week from the date of receipt/production of a copy of that order.

5. The decision of this Court rendered in the case of

3/4 Vikash Kumar v. State of Bihar & Ors in CWJC No. 8370/2020, as well as 5-6 other cases have been decided on the same line of action which are as follows:- (1). CWJC No. 8918/2020, (Amarjeet Yadav v. The Union of India & Ors) disposed of on 12.02.2021. (2). CWJC No. 8587, (Jay Prakash Kumar v. The Union of India & Ors) disposed of on 03.02.2021, (3). CWJC No. 8473/2020 (Subham Kumar v. The Union of India & Ors) disposed of on 17.02.2021, (4). CWJC No. 8126/2020 (Shashi Ranjan Prakash v. The Union of India & Ors) disposed of on 12.02.2021, (5). CWJC No. 8919/2020 ( Ravi Kumar v. The Union of India & Ors.) disposed of on 12.02.2021 & (6). CWJC No. 8256/2020 (Shashikant Kumar v. The Union of India & Ors) disposed of on 12.02.2021.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in other various writ petitions have decided the similar issue and have directed for holding a Review Medical Board for re-examination of the candidates, this writ petition is also disposed of with the same observations/directions as made in the cases mentioned hereinabove.

7. Accordingly, the impugned order/decision is, hereby, quashed and the respondents are directed to constitute a

4/4 Review Medical Board for re-examination of the petitioner within a period of one week from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, in accordance with law. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) perwez U