Delhi Police & ORS. v. Neeraj Kumari

$~52 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 30.05.2025 + DELHI POLICE & ORS.

.....Petitioners Through:

Ms.Pratima N. Lakra, CGSC with Mr.Chandan Prajapati & Mr.Shailendra Kumar Mishra, Advs.

versus NEERAJ KUMARI ....Respondent Through:

Nemo.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL) CM APPLs. 36130-31/2025 (Exemption) 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 8311/2025 & CM APPL. 36129/2025 2.

This petition has been filed by the petitioners, challenging the Order dated 07.03.2025, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as, 'Tribunal'), in O.A. No. 601/2025, titled Neeraj Kumari v. Delhi Police and Ors., whereby the said O.A. filed by the respondent herein

was allowed with the following directions:- "7.

In view of the above, the OA is disposed of with the following directions:- i) The order for cancellation of the candidature of the applicant dated 08.11.2024 is set aside.

ii) The respondents are directed to conduct re-medical examination of the applicant within thirty days of the receipt of a certified copy of this Order.

iii) Needless to say, in the event the applicant is found to be fit, all consequential benefits on notional basis shall follow."

3.

In the present case, the respondent was offered a Compassionate Appointment due to the unfortunate demise of her husband, Late HC (Exe.) Surender Singh, on 19.10.2021. However, during the medical examination, she was declared medically 'unfit' for appointment as her haemoglobin level was found to be low. Subsequently, she got herself tested at Dr.Lal Path Labs and also at Lal Bahadur Shastri Hospital, Delhi, where her haemoglobin level was found to be within the normal range.

4.

Though the learned counsel for the petitioner is correct in her submission that generally the Court should not interfere with the concurrent findings of the Detailed Medical Board and the Review Medical Board, in the present case, as the respondent was seeking a Compassionate Appointment, we, in the exercise of our powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, would not like to interfere with the directions passed by the learned Tribunal. 5.

We further clarify that our present order should not be treated as a precedent for other cases.

6.

The petition along with the pending application is, accordingly, dismissed.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J RENU BHATNAGAR, J MAY 30, 2025/rv/DG Click here to check corrigendum, if any