Allahabad High Court

CHANDRA MOHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

Decided: 3 February 2026
Bench: ANISH KUMAR GUPTA

Holding

The petitioner is not entitled to a third medical examination as the recruitment rules do not provide for it and no satisfactory government medical evidence was produced.

Summary

The petitioner applied for a Constable post in 2013, passed the written and physical tests, but was declared unfit in the medical examination due to poor vision (6/24 left, 6/18 right). He sought a re‑examination, which again found him unfit, and later produced private medical certificates claiming 6/6 vision in both eyes. He filed a writ petition requesting a third, independent medical board to verify his fitness. The State argued that the U.P. Police Constable and Head Constable Service Rules, 2015 (Rule 15(g) and Appendix 3) allow only one appeal and a review board, with no provision for a further examination. The Court examined the rules, noted the lack of any government medical report supporting the petitioner’s claim, and held that the rules do not permit a third medical test. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether a candidate declared unfit by the initial and review medical boards is entitled to a third medical examination under the U.P. Police Constable and Head Constable Service Rules, 2015.
Whether private medical certificates indicating normal vision can be relied upon to override the findings of the statutory medical board.
Whether the court can direct an independent medical board in the absence of a government medical report.

Subjects

medical examination
police recruitment
vision standards
review medical board
third medical test
U.P. Police Constable Service Rules
writ petition
unfit declaration

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - A No. - 25794 of 2015

Chandra Mohan
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And Anr.
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajesh Singh, Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

Court No. - 39
HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.

1. Heard Shri Seemant Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri
Girijesh Kumar Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the
State.
2. The instant petition has been filed praying for direction to the respondents
to conduct medical of the petitioner by the Medical Board for his
appointment on the post of Constable in the respondent department.
3. The brief of facts of the case are that in year 2013, a notification was
issued by U.P. Police Recruitment and Promotion Board, Lucknow for
filling up the vacant posts of Constable in police department by the police
department. Pursuant to the aforesaid advertisement, the petitioner had
applied for the post of Constable. He appeared in the written examination
and successfully qualified the same. Thereafter he appeared for the physical
test and qualified the same as well. Thereupon he was called for the medical
test. His medical test was conducted on 06.04.2015 by the Medical Board
and he was found unfit due to poor vision and his distance vision was found
to be 6/24 in the left eye and 6/18 in the right eye. Since there was less
vision in both eyes, he was declared unfit.
4. Thereupon the petitioner has claimed for re-medical examination at Pandit
Dindayal Hospital, Aligarh where he was examined on 15.04.2015. In re-
medical test also, his distance vision on the left eye was found 6/24 and 6/18
in the right eye and the four member Medical Board has opined that the
petitioner is suffering from low visual activity thus he was found unfit to be
appointed in the police force as Constable. Being declared unfit he could not
be selected. Subsequent thereto, on 23.04.2015 the petitioner himself got
examined at Swamy Bhajanand Eye Hospital at Mainpuri which appears to
be the hospital run by a private trust.
5. The vision of the petitioner is reported to be 6/6 and 6/6 in both eyes on
the basis of which on the same date the Chief Medical Superintendent,
WRIA No. 25794 of 2015
2

District Hospital, Mainpuri has issued a medical certificate in favour of the
petitioner reporting the eye vision by 6/6 in both eyes.
5. Relying upon the aforesaid medical certificate issued by the Chief
Medical Superintendent, District Hospital, Mainpuri as well as by Swami
Bhajanand Eye Hospital the petitioner has filed the instant petition claiming
that his vision was 6/6 and he has been wrongly declared unfit by Medical
Board as well as Review Medical Board.
6. Thus learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon the various
judgments passed by the Co-ordinate Benches as well as Division Bench of
this Court in Special Appeal No.806 of 2024 Rishabh Kumar vs. State of
U.P., Special Appeal No.597 of 2025 Sanjiv Vs. State of U.P., and
judgments passed by the Co-ordinate Benches in Writ -A No.14726 of
2018 Sandeep Kumar vs. State of U.P., has submitted that since the
petitioner's eye vision is 6/6 as has been certified by the Chief Medical
Superintendent, District Hospital, Mainpuri which renders the finding
recorded by the Medical Board as well as the Review Medical Board
insignificant, therefore, his medical examination is required to be conducted
by an independent Medical Board, to unravel the truth whether the petitioner
has been wrongly declared unfit for selection to the post of Constable in the
Civil Police. He claims that if he is found fit in the independent Medical
Board, the direction be issued for his appointment.
7. Per contra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State
submits that so far as the selection to the post of Constables and Head
Constables in the State of U.P. and the issue with regard to the medical
examination is concerned, it is governed by Rule 15(g) and Appendix 3 of
the U.P. Police Constable and Head Constable Service Rules, 2015.
8. Relying upon the aforesaid Rules, it has been submitted that if a
candidate is declared unfit and he claims that he is a fit person he can claim
for his re-examination for medical which has already been done in the
instant case by the petitioner. Accordingly, his Review Medical Board was
conducted at Pandit Dindayal Hospital, District Aligarh on 15.04.2015
where again he was found having poor vision as 6/24 and 6/18 in the left and
right eye respectively. Therefore, it was also observed that he was having
low visual activity, therefore, he was unfit for recruitment in the police s
ervices.
9. The instant petition has been filed relying upon the medical examination
of a private eye hospital on the basis of which it transpires that Chief
Medical Superintendent, District Hospital, Mainpuri has issued the medical
certificate dated 23.04.2015 in favour of the petitioner reporting the eye
vision of the petitioner to be 6/6 in both eyes. The petitioner has not
produced any document to support his case before issuing the certificate by
WRIA No. 25794 of 2015
3

the Chief Medical Superintendent, District Hospital, Mainpuri or any
medical examination with regard to the vision of the petitioner was
conducted in the District Hospital, Mainpuri. No report of the
Ophthalmologist has been annexed in this regard along with the said
certificate issued by the Chief Medical Superintendent, District Hospital,
Mainpuri.
10. In view thereof, the same cannot be relied upon specifically when the
Rules does not permit for any third medical test to be conducted of such
candidates, who was twice declared unfit by the Medical Board, constituted
for the purpose.
11. Again the petitioner had got issued another medical certificate dated
18.08.2018 which was issued by Chief Medical Officer, Mainpuri recording
his eye vision as 6/6 in both eyes. The aforesaid certificate also does not
give the basis upon which the said certificate was issued by the Chief
Medical Officer, Mainpuri. Therefore, the aforesaid certificates cannot be
relied upon for directing the third medical test which is not permissible
under the Rules, therefore, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for
the State prayed for dismissal of the instant writ petition.
12. Having heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the
parties, this Court has carefully gone through the record of the case. Rules
15(g) as well as Appendix of the U.P. Police Constable and Head Constable
Service Rules, 2015, which reads as under :-

"Rule - 15(g). Procedure for Direct Recruitment to the post of Constable.

"15. Procedure for Direct Recruitment to the post of Constable.-
(a)......
(b)...
(c)...
(d)...
(e)...
(f)...
(g) Medical Examination.-The candidates whose name are in the
select list sent as per clause (e), will be required to appear for
Medical Examination by the Appointing authority. Medical
Examination will be conducted in the Police Line of the
concerned District or at the place mentioned by the Appointing
authority. Medical Examination will be conducted as per
Appendix 3. The candidates found unsuccessful in Medical
Examination shall be declared unfit by the Appointing authority
and such vacancies shall be carried forward for next selection."
WRIA No. 25794 of 2015
4

13. Appendix 3 of the aforesaid Rules reads as under :-
"APPENDIX 3
[See Rule 15g]
Medical Examination for direct recruitment

The Appointing authority will request the Chief Medical Officer
of the concerned District to constitute Medical Board for
conducting Medical Examination. The Medical Board will consist
of three Doctors, who will conduct Medical Examination as per
"Police Recruitment Medical Examination Forms" as prescribed
and codified by Head of Department in consultation with
Director General of Medical Health. This form will be available
on U.P. Police website and also displayed at the place of Medical
Examination. Medical Board may take services of any expert as
per requirements.
(1) The doctors will examine the candidates in accordance with
the Medical Manual, if any, and announce the result on the day of
the Medical Examination.
(2) The result of the Medical Examination will be displayed on
the notice board outside the premises at the end of the day.
(3) Any candidate not satisfied by his Medical Examination, may
file an appeal on the day of examination itself. Any appeal in
regard to Medical Examination will not be considered if the
candidate fails to file appeal on the date of Medical Examination
and declaration of its result itself. The appeal should be disposed
of by the Medical Board, constituted for the same purpose within
two weeks of the appeal being filed. The Medical Board
constituted for appeal shall have expert regarding Medical
deficiency of the applicant.
(4) The members of the Medical Board who are found to give
wrong report wilfully will be liable for criminal proceedings.
(5) The Medical Examination is only qualifying in nature and it
has no effect on the merit list.
Note.- The Medical Board will examine the candidates and their
deficiencies such as knock knee, bow legs, flat feet, varicose
veins, distant and near vision, colour blindness, hearing test
comprising of Rinne's Test, Webber's Test and tests for vertigo
etc. as notified by the government from time to time. The Medical
Board may get conducted other examinations after obtaining
opinion of experts.".
WRIA No. 25794 of 2015
5

14. Rule 15 (g) provides that the candidates whose names are found in the
select list as per clause (e), will be required to appear for Medical
Examination by the Appointing authority. The medical examination will be
conducted in the Police Line of the concerned District or at the place
mentioned by the Appointing authority. The medical examination will be
conducted as per Appendix 3. If the candidate found unsuccessful in medical
examination, he shall be declared unfit by the Appointing authority and such
vacancies shall be carried forward for next selection.
15. Appendix 3 of the Rules provides for conducting of the medical
examination. The appointing authority shall request the Chief Medical
Officer to constitute the Medical Board for conducting the medical
examination. The Medical Board will consist of three-doctors, who will
conduct the medical examination as per the Police Recruitment Medical
Examination. It further provides that doctors will examine the candidate in
accordance with the medical manual, if any and declaration of the result of
the medical examination shall be displayed. Sub-clause 3 of the aforesaid
Appendix 3 provides that if any candidate is not satisfied by the medical
examination, he may file an appeal on the day of examination itself. Any
appeal in regard to medical examination will not be considered if the
candidate fails to file an appeal on the date of medical examination and
declaration of result itself meaning thereby on the date of the first medical
examination itself the candidate is required to file an appeal against the
medical examination result. The Review Medical Board constituted for
appeal shall have expert regarding medical deficiencies of the candidates as
pointed out by the Medical Board.
16. Thus, as per the aforesaid Rules, it is provided that on appeal being
made by the candidate, the review medical shall be conducted by the experts
to examine the deficiency. However, after the result of the Review Medical
Board on appeal, there was no provision for further medical examination to
be conducted.
17. In the instant case, initially the petitioner was examined on 06.04.2015
and was declared unfit due to low eye vision, as per eye vision of 6/18 and
6/24 in the right and left eyes respectively for distance vision, however, his
near vision was found to be within the para meters and N/6 and N/6. He
protested and filed the appeal. Accordingly, the Review Medical Board was
constituted and the experts consisting of the Eye Surgeon, Physician, Sr.
Surgeon and Ortho Surgeon examined and found that the petitioner was
having distance vision as 6/24 and 6/18 in the left and right eyes
respectively. Thus, he was found to have low visual activity BE. Thus, he
was found unfit to the post of Constable.
18. Since the Rules does not permit for any third medical examination to be
WRIA No. 25794 of 2015
6

conducted, therefore, in the considered in the opinion of this Court, the
petitioner is not entitled for any third medical examination to be conducted.
However, since the petitioner has placed reliance upon various judgements
of this Court, wherein this Court has ordered for third medical examination
on the grounds that the petitioner was subsequently examined by a
recognised Government hospital and it was reported that he was not having
the infirmity as was pointed out in his medical examination as well as review
medical examination.
19. In the instant case, no such report has been produced from any of the
Government hospitals with regard to the medical examination regarding the
distance vision of the petitioner herein. Only a medical examination
conducted by the Swamy Bajanand Eye Hospital has been produced, which
was conducted on 23.04.2015, and it appears that on the basis of the
aforesaid medical examination, the petitioner got medical certificate issued
dated 23.04.2015 by the Chief Medical Officer, District Hospital, Mainpuri
without there being any eye vision test in the District Hospital, Mainpuri, as
there is no document to support the same. Similarly, the subsequent
certificate which has been apparently issued by Chief Medical Office,
District Hospital, Mainpuri on 18.08.2015 is concerned, that was also
obtained by the petitioner suo moto and there is no supporting document to
suggest that any medical examination, whatsoever, was conducted in the
District Hospital, Mainpuri or under the supervision of the Chief Medical
Officer, Mainpuri.
20. For want of the aforesaid specific documents, this Court do not find any
good reason to exercise its discretion to direct any third medical test in the
instant case, specifically when the recruitment in question was of 2013, and
was concluded long back.
21. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed.

February 4, 2026
VS
(Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
VIDYA SAGAR BARATAM
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…