The Rajasthan High Court recently addressed a petition concerning a candidate for the constable position who was declared medically unfit due to hypertension. The court found that the medical evaluation did not adhere to the prescribed guidelines, particularly the omission of a 24-hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (ABPM) test, and ordered a re-examination of the candidate.
Background
The petitioner applied for the constable post and successfully cleared all preliminary assessments. During the medical examination, he was deemed unfit because of hypertension and was advised to undergo a Review Medical Examination (RME). In the RME, his blood pressure was measured twice and found to be within normal limits. A specialist cardiologist recommended a 24-hour ABPM test to obtain a comprehensive evaluation. However, instead of conducting this test, officials overruled the cardiologist's recommendation and proceeded without it.
Subsequently, the petitioner was declared unfit based on an average blood pressure reading of 152/96 mmHg, allegedly observed over 24 hours. The petitioner contended that the failure to perform the ABPM test, as recommended by the cardiologist, violated the established guidelines for medical examinations. He argued that the assessment was incomplete and inaccurate, leading to his unjust disqualification.
Court's Analysis
Justice Arun Monga presided over the case and scrutinized the procedures followed during the medical evaluation. The court noted that the Review Medical Board based its opinion on three blood pressure readings taken within a short span of 8.5 hours, rather than the recommended 24-hour observation. This approach was inconsistent with the guidelines, which stipulate that candidates rejected due to hypertension should be admitted or hospitalized for a thorough assessment before a final decision on their fitness is made.
The court emphasized that the petitioner's blood pressure was measured without proper admission, hospitalization, or a full 24-hour observation period, contravening the prescribed protocols. This procedural lapse led to the petitioner being declared unfit in violation of the applicable guidelines.
Judgment
In light of these findings, the court allowed the petition and directed that the petitioner undergo a re-examination. The re-examination must include a 24-hour observation period with blood pressure measurements taken at regular intervals to ensure an accurate assessment of his condition. Furthermore, the court ordered that one constable post be kept vacant for the petitioner until a fresh medical opinion is obtained, acknowledging his prior merit and eligibility.
Implications
This judgment underscores the importance of adhering to established medical examination guidelines, especially in recruitment processes for positions requiring physical fitness. The court's decision highlights the necessity of comprehensive and accurate medical evaluations to ensure fair treatment of candidates. By mandating the 24-hour ABPM test, the court reinforces the need for thorough assessments in cases of hypertension, recognizing that short-term measurements may not provide an accurate representation of an individual's health status.
The ruling also serves as a reminder to medical boards and recruitment authorities to strictly follow prescribed procedures, ensuring that candidates are evaluated fairly and transparently. This approach helps prevent unjust disqualifications and upholds the integrity of the recruitment process.
Conclusion
The Rajasthan High Court's directive for a re-examination of the petitioner, including a 24-hour ABPM test, reflects a commitment to ensuring that medical evaluations in recruitment processes are conducted in accordance with established guidelines. This decision not only provides relief to the petitioner but also sets a precedent for the meticulous application of medical assessment protocols in future recruitment examinations.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.