Sumit v. Union of India and Ors

JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

¶1Petitioner impugns order dated 23.06.2023, whereby the petitioner has been declared unfit on account of defective distant vision, right eye.

¶2The required standard for a right-handed person for the right eye are 6/6 and left eye are 6/9. The initial medical examination

reported low standard vision for both eyes as 6/9. Petitioner was subjected to a review medical examination where the petitioner was declared unfit on account of defective distant vision with right eye being 6/12 and left eye being 6/9.

¶3Learned counsel for petitioner contends that petitioner does not wear glasses and has 6/6 vision for both eyes.

¶4We unable the accept the contention of learned counsel for petitioner for the reasons that one of the documents annexed by the petitioner encloses with it a printout of an eye-testing machine, which reads as under:- <R> S C A

-0.75 -0.50

-0.75 -0.25

-0.75 -0.25

<-0.75 -0.25 108>

TL- -0.75 -0.25

PS

5.9

<L> S C A

-0.25 -0.50

-0.50 -0.25

-0.75 -0.25

<-0.50 -0.25 84>

TL- -0.50 -0.25

PS

6.2

PD

¶5The reading which is dated 22.06.2023 itself shows that the average power of the right eye after testing is -0.75 spherical with -0.25 cylindrical and at 108 degrees and for the left as -0.5 spherical -0.25 cylindrical at 84 degrees. This clearly demonstrates that petitioner does have perfect vision. The reporting on the side of the document as 6/6 appears to be with correction.

¶6As per the medical standards for fresh recruits, the eyesight has to be 6/6 for the right eye for the right-handed person and 6/9 for the left eye without any correction.

¶7Since the petitioner does not meet the requisite medical standard, we find no error on the part of the respondent in declaring the petitioner as UNFIT.

¶8In view of the above, we find no merit in petition. Petition is accordingly dismissed.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J

JULY 12, 2023/NA

MANOJ JAIN, J

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 12.07.2023 + W.P. (C) 9149/2023 & CM. APPL. 34791-92/2023 SUMIT ... PETITIONER versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .... RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner: Mr. Amit Kaushik, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Ankur Yadav, Senior Panel Counsel with Mr. Vivek, Advocate and Mr. Hemendra Singh, Deputy Commandant (Law), BSF. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN