- (1.) The petitioner was selected as a temporary staff in the Border Security Force on 14th July, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the said force). Thereafter by the letter dated 25th July, 2003 the Commandant of the said force intimated the petitioner that he was found medically fit by the recruitment authority at Narayanpur and he was appointed as Constable (General Duty) in BSF at Kalyani. The petitioner was also informed that he was entitled to pay and allowances from the date of his joining and the petitioner was allotted BSF Regimental No.03100164. According to the rules petitioner was supposed to undergo recruit basic training as required in the said force. Accordingly, the petitioner joined in subsidiary training centre, Border Security Force at Selugara (Siliguri District- Jalpaiguri). During his tenure petitioner was suddenly forced to undergo treatment for mental disorder in North Bengal Medical College and Hospital from 21st September, 2003 to 27th September, 2003. After the treatment he was released from the said hospital on 27th September, 2003 with the advice to take certain medicines as prescribed and to take bed rest for two weeks. The petitioner was again asked to appear before a medical board on 19th February, 2004 where the petitioner wad declared unfit for further service. As a result thereto the petitioner had undergone treatment in North Bengal Medical College and Hospital and subsequently on 12th May, 2004 the petitioner was declared fit to resume his service by the hospital authority. Curiously enough on 30th March, 2005 petitioner was show-caused by the respondent no.5 to explain why the petitioner should not retire from service under provision of Rule 25 of the aforesaid Rule. In reply to that show-cause notice the petitioner stated that his health condition has improved and he has been declared to be fit enough to resume his duties with arms and ammunitions on the basis of the findings of the Doctor who after perusing all the relevant case report came to the aforesaid findings. The petitioner was asked by the authority to appear before Doctor S.K. Das Professor and Head of the Department of Psychiatry North Bengal Medical College and Hospital. The petitioner was thoroughly checked by the said Professor and a report was submitted stating interalia that the petitioner was keeping well and he was found to be alert and attentive. No psychological disorder was detected. The petitioner was also advised by the specialised Doctor to undergo several medical tests in the aforesaid hospital and in pursuance thereto the petitioner duly performed all the tests as was suggested and it was found from all the test reports that there is no abnormality in the behaviour of the petitioner. By this time the authority decided to constitute a review medical board on 11th May, 2005 wherein the decision of the earlier medical board has been upheld by declaring the petitioner as completely and permanently incapable for further service in BSF, in consequence of psychiatric disorder since 20th September, 2003 in view of the provisions of Rule 18 and 25 of the said Rule. The said Order dated 2nd July 2005 issued by the respondent no.5 was communicated to the petitioner.
(2.) Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with impugned order the petitioner made a petition under Rule 28A of the said Rules on 8th August, 2005 praying for withdrawal of the impugned order and reinstate him in service forthwith. The said application was rejected by the impugned order dated 28th October, 2005. Challenging the same the petitioner previously filed a writ petition being WP No.19624 (W) of 2005 and during the pendency of the said application the impugned order was passed against which the petitioner did not move before this Hon'ble Court earlier. Therefore, challenging the impugned order the petitioner again filed the present writ petition for cancellation of the impugned order dated 19th February, 2004, 11th May, 2005 and 28th October, 2005 passed by the respondent authorities being annexure P2 herein.
(3.) Mr. Amal Baran Chatterjee, learned senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that findings of the review medical board have not been disclosed by the respondent authorities in the affidavit filed by them.;