Abdul Moin,j. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents.
(2.) In pursuance to the order dated 29.08.2019, affidavit of compliance filed today in Court is taken on record. Along with the affidavit of compliance has been filed the order dated 07.09.2019, a copy of which is Annexure CA-2, in pursuance to which it is contended that the petitioner has been appointed on the post of Constable.
(3.) The matter in issue has been summed up by this Court vide order dated 09.05.2019, which, for the sake of convenience, is reproduced as under:- "1. Supplementary rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the petitioner in Court today is taken on record. 2. By means of the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the list issued by the respondent no. 1 to the extent it cancels the selection of the petitioner whose name finds place at Serial No. 1681 of the list. 3. By means of an amendment, a prayer for quashing of the order dated 25.01.2011, a copy of which is annexure 6A to the writ petition has also been prayed for. Through the order dated 25.01.2011, the petitioner has been informed that he has been declared unfit in the medical examination and the admit card had erroneously been issued to him and hence his candidature has been rejected. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in the supplementary counter affidavit which has been filed by the respondents dated 10.04.2019 in pursuance to the order of this Court dated 12.02.2018, it is revealed that in the medical examination which took place on 21.01.2010, no medical deficiency was found with respect to the petitioner. However, in the examination by the Medical Board which was conducted on 18.02.2010, it has been indicated that the petitioner has been declared unfit in the 'ENT' category. The same is duly endorsed by various doctors including one ENT surgeon namely Sri Sayed Ahmad. Copies of the medical reports have been filed as annexure SCA 1. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that after his medical examination, he had also got himself medically examined on 01.02.2011 from Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya Hospital, Lucknow wherein no deficiency has been found by the doctors of the Hospital so far as it pertains to ENT. Thus, it is contended that a suspicion is raised over the unfitness of the petitioner in the category of ENT when compared with the medical examination of 29.01.2010 viz-a-viz the subsequent medical examination on 18.02.2010. The said suspicion is also fortified by the clean medical chit given by Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya Hospital, Lucknow on 01.02.2011. 6. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and having perused the records, this Court is of the view that keeping in view the aforesaid anomaly which comes out from a perusal of the medical examination dated 29.01.2010 in which no medical deficiency is found for the petitioner viz-a-viz the medical examination dated 18.02.2010 which finds the petitioner as medical unfit in the ENT category and as compared to the medical certificate issued by Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya Hospital, Lucknow dated 01.02.2011 when again no medical deficiency is found with respect to the petitioner in the ENT category as such it would be in the fitness of thing that the medical board to be constituted by the State re-examine the petitioner in the ENT category and to submit its report within a period of four weeks from today. 7. Accordingly, let a medical board be constituted by the respondent no. 2 i.e Uttar Pradesh Police Recruitment and Promotion Board, Tulsiganga Complex, Vidhan Sabha Marg, Lucknow and the petitioner be called to appear before the the said medical board in writing. Let the said medical board examine the petitioner and submit its report. The said report would be submitted by means of a supplementary affidavit to be filed by the State counsel. 8. Let the entire exercise be completed within a period of four wee ks from today. 9. List this case in the first week of July, 2019.";