Patna High Court
Raju KumarversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The original medical board’s finding of unfitness stands and the petition for mandamus is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, Raju Kumar, applied for a home‑guard post under Advertisement No. 2 of 2011 but was declared medically unfit due to "knock knee" by the recruiting medical board and consequently not selected. He later obtained a medical report from Patna Medical College Hospital (PMCH) dated 25‑July‑2015 stating he was fit, and filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to nominate him and accept the PMCH report. The respondents argued that the selection process and medical examination were conducted by a duly constituted committee, that there is no provision for a re‑medical test, and that the petitioner's objections were unsustainable. The court relied on the Delhi High Court’s decision in KM Priyanka vs Union of India, which held that once a medical board for a force deems a candidate unfit, later opinions of private or other government doctors cannot override that finding. Applying this principle, the court concluded that the petitioner had not made out a case for relief and dismissed the writ application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to be declared fit based on a subsequent medical report and be appointed as home guard.
- Whether the court can direct the respondents to overturn the original medical board's finding of unfitness.
- Whether the writ of mandamus is maintainable in the circumstances.
Subjects
- home guard recruitment
- medical fitness
- mandamus
- selection process
- medical board
- re‑examination
- administrative law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2316 of 2017
======================================================
Raju Kumar Son of Shri Devendra Jha, Resident of village - Meghaul, Police
Station - Khodabanpur, District - Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, Home Special , Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna
3. The Director General - Cum - Commandant General, Bihar Homeguards,
Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
Mr. Sikandar Kumar Yadav, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md. Irshad, AC to SC- 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 20-01-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the respondents.
2. Aggrieved by his non-selection as home guard
pursuant to Advertisement no. 2 of 2011, the petitioner has
preferred the instant writ application for the following relief:
“1. That this is an
application for issuance of a writ in
the nature of Mandamus and/or any
other appropriate writ, order or
direction commanding upon the
respondents to make nomination of the
petitioner as Home -gaurd against the
5 post for Khodabandpur Block, and
Patna High Court CWJC No.2316 of 2017 dt.20-01-2026
2/6
further to direct the respondents to
accept the report dated 25-07-2015 of
the P.M.C.H. whereby fresh medical
examination of the petitioner for his
fitness was done and he has been
declared fit and to hold that earlier
Medical Board Report was erroneous
whereby nothing abnormal was
detected and the remark has been
noted ‘Knee knock’ though the knees
of the petitioner do not touch each
other in any way which is apparent by
simple look and to direct the
respondents to consider the
petitioner’s case for their selection/
nomination as Home-guards.”
3. It is the case of the petitioner that having applied
for appointment as home guard against Advertisement no. 2 of
2011, the petitioner participated in the physical test but was
incorrectly shown as unfit and suffering from knock knee. It is
the case of the petitioner that soon thereafter he got himself
examined in the Patna Medical College Hospital (PMCH) and
as per the report dated 25.7.2015 (Annexure-5), there is a clear
finding/certification to the effect that the petitioner does not
suffer from knock knee. As such, it is submitted by learned
counsel for the petitioner that having illegally being declared
Patna High Court CWJC No.2316 of 2017 dt.20-01-2026
3/6
medically unfit and in view of his examination conducted at
PMCH, the petitioner be selected as home guard and direction
be given to the respondents to appoint him.
4. The application is opposed by learned counsel
appearing for the respondents. Referring to the contents of the
counter affidavit, it is submitted that after the initial process of
selection, all the candidates were medically examined and 107
of the candidates including the petitioner were disqualified for
one reason or the other. Out of the disqualified candidates, 59
persons submitted their objections requesting for re-medical
test. The petitioner also requested that he be re-examined in
view of the medical test report of the PMCH. It is submitted by
learned counsel for the respondents that the objections were
referred to a duly constituted committee which after having
scrutinized and checked the objections found the same
unsustainable. It is further submitted that there is no provision
for re-medical test and thus the request of the petitioner was
rejected. It is submitted that no case for grant of any relief has
been made out by the petitioner.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused
the material on record.
6. The matter arises out of Advertisement no. 2 of
Patna High Court CWJC No.2316 of 2017 dt.20-01-2026
4/6
2011 published by the respondents on 16.7.2011 in the daily
newspaper for appointment of home guards in rural and urban
areas in the State of Bihar. Out of the total vacancy of 11122, in
the district of Begusarai with which the petitioner is interested,
there were 153 vacancies of rural home guards and 17 for urban
home guards. Pursuant to having been found fit in the physical
test, the petitioner was medically examined by the team of
specialized Doctors who diagnosed the petitioner to be having
knock knee and thus the petitioner was not selected. The
petitioner, on the other hand, relies on the subsequent medical
test undergone by him at the PMCH.
7. At this stage, it would be relevant to take into
consideration the judgment in the case of KM. Priyanka vs.
Union of India & Ors. [W.P.(C) 10783 of 2020] wherein the
Delhi High Court in paragraph no. 8 has held as follows:
“8. We have on several
occasions observed that the standard of
physical fitness for the Armed Forces and
the Police Forces is more stringent than
for civilian employment. We have, in Priti
Yadav Vs. Union of India 2020 SCC
OnLine Del 951; Jonu Tiwari Vs. Union
of India 2020 SCC OnLine Del 855;
Nishant Kumar Vs. Union of India 2020
SCC OnLine Del 808 and Sharvan
Kumar Rai Vs. Union of India 2020 SCC
Patna High Court CWJC No.2316 of 2017 dt.20-01-2026
5/6
OnLine Del 924, held that once no mala
fides are attributed and the doctors of the
Forces who are well aware of the
demands of duties of the Forces in the
terrain in which the recruited personnel
are required to work, have formed an
opinion that a candidate is not medically
fit for recruitment, opinion of private or
other government doctors to the contrary
cannot be accepted inasmuch as the
recruited personnel are required to work
for the Forces and not for the private
doctors or the government hospitals and
which medical professionals are unaware
of the demands of the duties in the
Forces. In fact, the case of Priti Yadav
(supra) also related to ‘cubital valgus’. It
is also to be noted that the specialists
that the petitioner had consulted had also
found that the petitioner suffered from
‘cubital valgus’ and therefore, the
findings by the Medical Boards were not
wrong.”
8. Taking into consideration the facts of the instant
case and the decision in KM. Priyanka (supra), it has to be
reiterated that once on a medical examination being conducted
for recruitment of personnel for the forces and a person is found
not to be medically fit for recruitment, subsequent medical
examination of the petitioner/candidate by some other private or
Patna High Court CWJC No.2316 of 2017 dt.20-01-2026
6/6
government Doctor with results to the contrary cannot be
accepted as the candidate to be appointed is required to perform
the work of the force which the other medical personnel or the
other Doctors conducting the medical test on the petitioner are
not aware of.
9. For these reasons, once the petitioner was found
medically unfit for appointment by the Doctors who examined
the petitioner in the process of selection for appointment as
home guard, in the opinion of the Court, the re-examination
even by a government Doctor of PMCH who is not aware of the
requirements of the work the petitioner is required to carry out
as a home guard would not be of much assistance to the
petitioner.
10. In view of the facts and circumstances of the
case, in the opinion of the Court, the petitioner has not made out
any case for grant of relief in the instant application.
11. The application is dismissed.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 20.1.2026
Transmission Date NA
Checking your session…