High CourtsDivision Bench(2024) 11 DEL CK 2056

Union Of India & Ors. vs Khushbu Kumari

Delhi High Court · Decided on 25 November 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Navin Chawla, J · Shalinder Kaur, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
W.P.(C) 14634/2024, CM APPL. 61436/2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 382 words

NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)

1.

This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Order dated 10.05.2024, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (in short, ‘Tribunal’) in Original Application (in short, ‘OA’) No. 969/2024, insofar as it pertains to Ms. Khushbu Kumari.

2.

The learned Tribunal in its Impugned Order has directed the petitioner herein to constitute a Review Medical Board (RMB) for examining the respondent herein.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent was declared unfit for appointment to the post of Constable (Exe) by the Detailed Medical Examination Report, which held as under:

Exhibit reproduced from the original judgment
4.

The respondent being aggrieved of the same, applied for an RMB, which has also declared her unfit for appointment after referring her to a specialist, who opined that there are chances of Keloid recurrence and being malign.

5.

The respondent challenged the above findings before the learned Tribunal.

6.

The learned Tribunal, considering the disqualification being solely on the grounds of a tattoo, allowed the OA by directing a re-medical examination. The learned Tribunal did not consider the disqualification of the respondent also being on account of the Keloid and the report of the expert on the same.

7.

The learned counsel for the respondent is not in a position to dispute the above. We have also gone through the Impugned Order and find that there is no discussion in the same on the other ground of disqualification of the respondent, that is Keloid, and the medical opinion obtained by the RMB from an expert.

8.

Accordingly, we allow the present petition and remand the matter to the learned Central Administrative Tribunal to consider the same afresh, keeping in view the disqualification of the respondent on the basis of Keloid.

9.

We make it clear that presently we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the findings of the learned Tribunal qua the disqualification of the petitioner for having a tattoo. In case the decision of the learned Tribunal is adverse to the petitioner, it shall be open to the petitioner to challenge the same even on the said ground.

10.

The parties shall appear before the learned Central Administrative Tribunal on 19th December, 2024.

11.

The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.