Case Note & Summary
The case pertains to a candidate (respondent) who participated in the Civil Services Examination, 2014 (CSE 2014) conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). The candidate qualified the preliminary and main examinations and appeared for an interview on 2nd June 2015. On 3rd June 2015, he underwent a medical examination at B.R. Ambedkar Hospital, New Delhi, where his Body Mass Index (BMI) was found to be 32, exceeding the required maximum of 30, and he was declared 'temporarily unfit'. The medical report was uploaded on the department's website on 17th June 2015. The final select list of 1236 candidates was published on 4th July 2015, but the candidate's name was not included. Later, a consolidated reserve list was published on 19th January 2016, in which the candidate's name appeared at Sl. No. 16. On 9th March 2016, allotments were made to various Group 'A' and Group 'B' services from the reserve list. The candidate made a representation on 10th March 2016, requesting a re-medical examination, attaching a medical fitness certificate dated 24th February 2016. This request was denied by the authorities as it was beyond the six-month period from the date of the medical report (17th June 2015). The candidate then approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which initially passed an interim order on 17th August 2016 directing re-medical examination, but later dismissed the original application on 5th September 2017, holding that the representation was beyond the six-month period under Rule 7(a)(vi) of Appendix-III of the CSE Rules, 2014. The candidate challenged this before the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad, which set aside the Tribunal's order on 6th April 2021, directing the Union of India to conduct a re-medical examination within four weeks. The High Court interpreted the word 'ordinarily' in Rule 7(a)(vii) as conferring discretion to relax the time limit in special cases. The Union of India appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that the word 'ordinarily' must be read with 'maximum' and does not confer a general discretion to extend the six-month period; it only covers exceptional circumstances like pregnancy. The Court noted that the candidate's representation was clearly beyond six months, and the mere fact that his name appeared in the reserve list later did not extend the time. The Court set aside the High Court's judgment and restored the Tribunal's order, dismissing the candidate's application. The re-medical examination conducted pursuant to the Supreme Court's interim order was not considered as it was beyond the prescribed period.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Civil Services Examination - Medical Fitness - Re-medical Examination - Rule 7(a)(vii) of Appendix-III of CSE Rules, 2014 - The issue was whether a candidate declared 'temporarily unfit' due to BMI exceeding 30 could be granted re-medical examination beyond the six-month period. The Supreme Court held that the word 'ordinarily' in Rule 7(a)(vii) must be read with 'maximum' and does not confer a general discretion to extend the period; it only covers exceptional cases such as pregnancy. The High Court's direction for re-medical examination was set aside. (Paras 14-18) B) Service Law - Civil Services Examination - Reserve List - Right to Re-medical Examination - Rule 16(4) and (5) of CSE Rules, 2014 - The candidate's name appeared in the consolidated reserve list on 19th January 2016, but his representation for re-medical examination on 10th March 2016 was beyond six months from the medical report uploaded on 17th June 2015. The Court held that the mere inclusion in the reserve list does not extend the time for re-medical examination. (Paras 15-17) C) Service Law - Civil Services Examination - Final Attempt - Sympathy - The candidate was in his fifth and final attempt, but the Court held that sympathy cannot override statutory rules. The re-medical examination conducted pursuant to the Court's interim order was not considered as it was beyond the prescribed period. (Paras 14, 18)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in directing re-medical examination of a candidate beyond the six-month period stipulated under Rule 7(a)(vii) of Appendix-III of the CSE Rules, 2014, by interpreting the word 'ordinarily' as conferring discretion to relax the time limit.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court judgment dated 6th April 2021, and restored the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 5th September 2017 dismissing the candidate's application. The re-medical examination conducted pursuant to the Court's interim order was not considered.
Law Points
- Interpretation of 'ordinarily' in Rule 7(a)(vii) of Appendix-III of CSE Rules 2014
- Maximum period for re-medical examination
- Discretion of courts in service matters
- Finality of medical examinations in civil services recruitment
