Supreme Court Allows Re-medical for UPSC Candidate Who Missed Examination Due to Mistaken Belief of Selection Process Completion — Exercise of Article 142 Powers to Do Complete Justice. The Court directed re-medical examination for a candidate who was declared temporarily unfit and missed the re-medical, subject to conditions that appointment shall be from date of appointment and not from 2014 batch.

  • 568
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner applied for the Civil Services Examination 2014 conducted by UPSC. He qualified in all stages including Prelims, Mains, and Interview. In the medical examination on 29.04.2015, he was declared temporarily unfit due to a Body Mass Index (BMI) of 31.75, exceeding the prescribed standard of 30. He was called for a re-medical test on 14.07.2015. However, before that date, on 04.07.2015, UPSC published the final result in which the petitioner's name did not appear. Believing the selection process was complete, he did not attend the re-medical. On 19.01.2016, a consolidated reserve list of 126 candidates was published, and the petitioner was ranked 93rd, but candidates up to rank 97 were allocated service. He approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna, which dismissed his application relying on a similar case of K. Rajashekhara Reddy. The petitioner then filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court. During its pendency, the case of K. Rajashekhara Reddy was allowed by the Telangana High Court and subsequently by the Supreme Court, which directed re-medical and consideration for appointment under Article 142. The petitioner withdrew his writ petition and made a representation to the respondents, but it was rejected citing the time limit for re-medical. He then filed a writ petition under Article 32 before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court rejected the prayer for allocation of service and consequential benefits for the 2014 examination. However, considering the similarity with K. Rajashekhara Reddy's case and the petitioner's age (35) and exhaustion of attempts, the Court directed the respondents to schedule a re-medical test within four weeks. The Court clarified that if the petitioner qualifies, his appointment shall be from the date of appointment, not from 2014, and he shall not claim seniority in the 2014 batch. The decision was made under Article 142 and shall not be treated as a precedent.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Article 142 - Complete Justice - Exercise of plenary powers - The Supreme Court directed re-medical examination for a candidate who missed the re-medical due to mistaken belief that selection process was complete, relying on its earlier order in a similar case - Held that Article 142 can be invoked to do complete justice in exceptional circumstances, but the decision shall not be treated as a precedent (Paras 13-15).

B) Service Law - Medical Fitness - Temporary Unfitness - Re-medical Examination - The petitioner was declared temporarily unfit due to high BMI and was called for re-medical but did not appear - The Court directed re-scheduling of the re-medical test, subject to conditions that if found fit, appointment shall be from date of appointment and not from 2014 batch - Held that the petitioner's case is similar to that of K. Rajashekhara Reddy who was granted relief (Paras 1-15).

C) Civil Services Examination - Reserve List - Allocation of Service - The petitioner's name appeared in the consolidated reserve list but he was not allocated service due to medical unfitness - The Court rejected the prayer for allocation of service and consequential benefits for the 2014 examination - Held that the only relief is re-medical examination (Paras 10-16).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner, who was declared temporarily unfit and missed the re-medical examination due to mistaken belief that the selection process was complete, is entitled to a direction for re-medical examination and consequential appointment.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court partly allowed the writ petition. It rejected the prayer for allocation of service and consequential benefits for the 2014 examination. However, it directed the respondents to call the petitioner for a re-medical test within four weeks. If the petitioner qualifies, his appointment shall be from the date of appointment, not from 2014, and he shall not claim seniority in the 2014 batch. The decision was made under Article 142 and shall not be treated as a precedent.

Law Points

  • Article 142 of the Constitution of India
  • Civil Services Examination Rules 2014
  • Medical fitness standards
  • Temporary unfitness
  • Re-medical examination
  • Limitation period for re-medical
  • Exercise of plenary powers for complete justice
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (SC) (8) 25

Writ Petition (Civil) No. 000000 of 2023

2023-08-01

[PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA J. , PANKAJ MITHAL J.]

Mr. M.L.Varma, Sr. Advocate for petitioner; Mr. VVV Pattabhiram, Advocate for respondents

Rakshit Shivam Prakash

Union of India and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking directions for re-medical examination and allocation of service in the Civil Services Examination 2014.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought (i) allocation of service with consequential benefits against CSE 2014 at par with similarly placed candidates in the Reserve List dated 19.01.2016, and (ii) direction for conduct of re-medical examination if required.

Filing Reason

Petitioner was declared temporarily unfit due to high BMI, missed re-medical examination due to mistaken belief that selection process was complete, and was not allocated service despite being in the reserve list.

Previous Decisions

Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna dismissed petitioner's application relying on K. Rajashekhara Reddy's case. Petitioner withdrew writ petition before Patna High Court to make representation, which was rejected by Department of Personnel and Training.

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for re-medical examination after missing the original re-medical due to mistaken belief. Whether the petitioner is entitled to allocation of service and consequential benefits for the Civil Services Examination 2014.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that he is similarly placed to K. Rajashekhara Reddy, who was granted relief by the Supreme Court under Article 142. Respondents argued that the decision in K. Rajashekhara Reddy's case upholds the time limit for re-medical and that the petitioner's status is confirmed as unfit for all services.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court exercised its plenary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to do complete justice in exceptional circumstances, directing re-medical examination for a candidate who missed it due to mistaken belief, but limited the relief by not granting appointment from the original batch or seniority, and clarified that the decision shall not be treated as a precedent.

Judgment Excerpts

The most amazing things in life happen right at the moment you are about to give up hope. We consider it appropriate to grant a limited relief. This will be to direct the respondents to re-schedule the re-medical test that was to be conducted on 14.07.2015, which the petitioner unfortunately missed. This is an exceptional case in which we have exercised our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to do complete justice and as such the present decision shall not be treated as a precedent in any case.

Procedural History

Petitioner applied for CSE 2014, qualified all stages, declared temporarily unfit on 29.04.2015, called for re-medical on 14.07.2015. Final result published on 04.07.2015 without petitioner's name. Petitioner did not appear for re-medical. Reserve list published on 19.01.2016 with petitioner at rank 93, but candidates up to rank 97 allocated service. Petitioner approached CAT Patna, which dismissed application. Petitioner filed writ petition before Patna High Court. During pendency, K. Rajashekhara Reddy's case was allowed by Supreme Court on 14.06.2022. Petitioner withdrew writ petition and made representation, which was rejected. Petitioner then filed writ petition under Article 32 before Supreme Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 32, Article 142
  • Civil Services Examination Rules, 2014:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appellant in Kerala Surcharge on Taxes Act Case Because Act Not Retrospective for Assessment Year 1957-58. Kerala Surcharge on Taxes Act, 1957 Section 2 Held Inapplicable to Agricultural Income-Tax Assessment for Year Beginning A...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Heard Criminal Appeal Against Conviction Under Sections 302 and 201 Indian Penal Code. Appeal Challenged Reliance on Child Witness and Circumstantial Evidence.