Judiciary Cannot Substitute Medical Expertise – Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Medical Unfitness in ITBP Recruitment
In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the medical unfitness declaration in the recruitment process for the post of Constable (Animal Transport) in the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP). Justice Jagmohan Bansal, while delivering the judgment on November 20, 2023, in the case of Sonu Vs. Union of India and Others (CWP-3903-2016), emphasized the court’s limitation in substituting the opinions of medical experts.
The petitioner, Sonu, was declared medically unfit for the recruitment due to ‘hypertension with mild mitral regurgitation’, a decision he challenged as being wrongful. Despite re-examinations, including one ordered by the High Court at PGIMER, the medical boards consistently found the petitioner to suffer from Stage-I Hypertension.
Justice Bansal, in his judgment, stressed the primacy of expert medical opinion in such matters, stating, “This Court cannot substitute opinion of Doctors who are experts in their subjects.” The judgment also referred to a similar case (LPA No.871 of 2022 titled ‘Sumit Vs. Union of India’), reinforcing the finality of the medical board’s opinion in recruitment processes.
The court dismissed the petition, underscoring the lack of judicial expertise to overrule or reassess the findings of medical professionals. This decision marks a significant precedent in cases involving the medical fitness of candidates in defense and paramilitary forces, where physical and medical standards are of paramount importance.
Date of Decision: 20th November 2023
SONU VS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
