Supreme Court: Medical board’s squint finding held erroneous, appellant entitled to police constable appointment
The Supreme Court held that the medical board’s disqualification on the basis of a squint eye was erroneous and ordered the appellant’s appointment as police constable without seniority.
The Supreme Court, hearing the appeal of Akanksha Devi against the State of Uttar Pradesh, allowed the appellant’s petition and ordered the respondents to issue an appointment or call‑letter for the post of Police Constable (Civil). The Court held that the earlier medical disqualification was untenable and that the appellant was entitled to be appointed, albeit without seniority over candidates already placed.
The appellant had successfully cleared document verification, the written test and the physical standards test for the Uttar Pradesh Police Constable (Civil) recruitment. She was then summoned for a medical examination, where the medical board recorded a squint eye and declared her medically unfit. A re‑examination by the same board reaffirmed the finding. Subsequently, an independent ophthalmic panel from King George’s Medical University examined her and reported normal vision with no disqualifying defect.
The principal issue was whether the medical board’s determination of unfitness on the basis of a squint eye was erroneous and whether the appellant was entitled to appointment. Relying on the independent ophthalmic report that contradicted the earlier assessment, the Court concluded that the medical board’s finding was indeed erroneous. Accordingly, the Court set aside the impugned order, directed issuance of the appointment without seniority, and ordered that all pending applications be consigned to the records.
Read the judgment and its head note on DLJ: Akanksha Devi vs State Of Up (2026 INSC 1184).