Akash Nandi v. Union Of India And ORS.

S/L 35 20.04.2026 Court No.18 SD

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION WPA 28891 of 2025 Akash Nandi Vs.

The Union of India & Ors.

Mr. Ashis Kumar Chowdhury Mr. Babhru Bahan Bera Mr. Rohan Paul ... for the Petitioner.

Mr. Pinaki Bhattacharya Mrs. Aishwarya Rajyashree ... for the Union of India.

1.

Report of the Assistant Commandant (Law) for IGP, WBS, CRPF, Kolkata dated April 17, 2026 handed over in Court today be retained with the records. 2.

It appears therefrom that the medical report of the Board of AIIMS, Kalyani was examined by the authority. The medical Board, AIIMS opined that the petitioner is fit for normal physical activity. 3.

The respondent authority, however, observed that the petitioner is a post-operative case of left proximal humerus osteochondroma.

The present radiograph shows cortical thinning at the site of excision; and such cortical thinning may act as a risk factor for fracture, particularly under stressful conditions.

4.

The Medical Directorate after examining the report of AIIMS, Kalyani has opined that the petitioner may be at risk of fracture during vigorous physical activities, especially during basic training. He may not

be able to safely withstand the rigours of training required in CAPFs.

5.

The authority has stated that after obtaining expert opinion of the Medical Directorate, it has been found that the petitioner may not be suitable for appointment in CAPFs where high physical endurance and strenuous training are essential. The duties of CAPFs personnel involve physically demanding operational roles and any underlying condition posing a risk of fracture may adversely affect performance of duties and operational readiness.

6.

The report plainly suggests that though the petitioner may be fit to perform normal physical activity but he is unfit for appointment in CAPFs. 7.

In view of the considered stand taken by the Medical Board, the Court is unable to grant any relief to the petitioner in the instant case.

8.

The writ petition fails and stands dismissed. 9.

Parties to act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Amrita Sinha, J.)