ITEM NO.29                 COURT NO.1               SECTION IVB

           S U P R E M E   C O U R T   O F   I N D I A                          RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS                      Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).1877/2007

(From the judgement and order dated 07/08/2006 in  CWP No. 13031/2003  of The HIGH COURT OF  PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH)

AJAY KUMAR                                           Petitioner(s)

                     VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                                Respondent(s)

(With prayer for interim relief and office report )

Date: 14/05/2009  This Petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :         HON'BLE  THE CHIEF JUSTICE         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK VERMA

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. For Mr. D. Mahesh Babu,Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Subhash Kaushik, Adv. Mr. S.N. Terdal, Adv. For Ms. Sushma Suri,Adv.

          UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following                                O R D E R  

Leave granted.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order.

    (R.K. Dhawan)    (Shashi Bala Vij) Court Master    Court Master

(Signed order is placed on the file)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.3578 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.1877 of 2007)

AJAY KUMAR ...APPELLANT.

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA  & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS.

O R D E R

Leave granted.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The appellant was originally recruited as constable in CRPF but during the  

course of medical examination it was found that his vision was not normal.  Then he was  

subjected to Examination by the Medical Board on 24th April, 2002 and it was found that  

though  he  had  no  manifest  squint,  he  had  moderate  exophoria  with  slow  recovery  and  

ultimately the Board opined that the candidate is fit for the job of Constable in CRPF.  But  

subsequently  on  24th March,  2003,  his  services  were  terminated  on  the  ground  that  the  

Director of Medical Directorate found him unsuitable.  The appellant filed a writ petition and  

the High Court referred the matter to the Medical Board consisting of some senior doctors  

from  the  Postgraduate  Institute  of  Medical  Education  and  Research,  Chandigarh.   The  

Medical Board gave the following opinion:

“He had unaided visual acuity of 6/6 in both eyes and his  color vision and  

fundus examination was found

-2-

to  be  within  normal  limits.   He  has  no  manifest  squint.   However,  he  has  

exophoria for near with slow recovery.   Worth four dot test showed binocular  

single vision.  In our opinion,  the candidate  is  fit  for the job of Constable  in  

CRPF.”

In view of the medical opinion expressed by the Medical Board of the Postgraduate  

Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, we are unable to agree with the  

respondent that the appellant is not medically fit.  Respondents are directed to reinstate the  

appellant forthwith.  The appellant is not entitled to get back wages for the period he was out  

of service.  But for the period he was in service, the wages may be paid as soon as he is  

reinstated in service.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

                 ...................CJI    (K.G. BALAKRISHNAN)

             .....................J    (P. SATHASIVAM)

             .....................J    (DEEPAK VERMA)

NEW DELHI;    MAY 14, 2009.