Supreme Court Grants Relief To CAPF Aspirant Rejected Twice Citing Visual Disability, Asks Authority To Observe Him During Probation

The Supreme Court recently directed the Central Armed Police Force (CAPF) to consider a candidate for recruitment as Assistant Commandant after he was rejected twice due to defective vision. 

The Court examined the expert medical reports from AIIMs, which held that he did not suffer from any visual defects/ glaucoma in both eyes and can be considered a fit candidate. 

The bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Datta was hearing a challenge to the Allahabad High Court's order, which dismissed a writ petition seeking further opportunities to undergo a medical test for recruitment to the post of Assistant Commandant in the Central Armed Police Force (CAPF).

On 24.04.2024, a recruitment notification was issued for Assistant Commandant in CAPF. The appellant cleared the written exam under the General Category and qualified the physical test. However, he was declared medically unfit on 18.12.2024 due to defective vision and was referred to the Medical Board.

The Board opined that he is unfit for recruitment as he suffered from 'glaucoma'. The appellant, then, approached the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Delhi. It is claimed that he was found medically fit. Relying upon the AIIMS report, the appellant approached the High Court. 

The High Court dismissed his petition on the grounds that he could not be permitted to undergo a medical test for the 3rd time. 

When the matter came for hearing earlier before the Supreme Court, the Court allowed the appellant to get in touch with Dr. Pradeep Venkatesh, Ophthalmologist, to find out whether (1) the appellant is suffering from `glaucoma' or not; (2) if he is suffering from it, whether it is of such extent to have a material bearing on his fitness to render service as a prospective member of the CAPF.

Subsequently, the Court referred to a report from AIIMS dated May 27, along with the opinion of the medical board comprising several experts dated May 26. The Board concluded that "there is no evidence of `glaucoma' on clinical examination of both eyes”. 

Considering the same, the court allowed the appellant to be considered for appointment as Assistant Commandant in CAPF. 

The Court directed that the respondents may monitor the appellant's health during probation to ensure no issues arise, despite current medical fitness. It was further directed to call the appellant for an interview, and if he qualifies, he shall be offered the post of Assistant Commandant. The order states : 

"It goes without saying that the respondents will closely observe the performance of the appellant while he is on probation to see that the suspected ailment, which has not been found at this stage by the Medical Board of AIIMS, does not cause any impediment in the performance of his duties. In fact, the scheme of the Rules/Regulations governing service conditions of the officers/officials of the para-military forces sufficiently take care of such an eventuality even after an appointee on probation has successfully completed his period of probation."

"With liberty aforementioned to the respondents, they are directed to call the appellant for interview on the premise that he is medically fit. In case the appellant qualifies in the interview, in that event he shall be offered appointment for the post of Assistant Commandant." 

Counsel for Appellants : Mr. Aditya Kumar Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Dhurva Shankar Mishra, AOR Mr. Sandeep Kr.Pandey, Adv. Mr. Saurav Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Utkarsh Kumar, Adv. Ms. Geeta Shakya, Adv.

Counsel for Respondents : Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, A.S.G. Ms. Harshita Choubey, Adv. Mr. Chitrangda Rashtravara, Adv. Ms. Shagun Thakur, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Hrishikesh Baruah, Adv. Mr. Uttakarsh Dwivedi, Adv.

Case details : DIVYANSHU SINGH v. THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.| CIVIL APPEAL No.7254 OF 2025

Click Here To Read/Download Order