MUHAMMAD FARHAN vs The PROVINCE OF PUNJAB, through Inspector General of Police, Lahore R

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

MUHAMMAD FARHAN VS The PROVINCE OF PUNJAB, through Inspector General of Police, Lahore R.12.16---Punjab Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities Act (XLII of 2002), Preamble---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 4, 25 & 175(f)---Recruitment in Police department---Constable, candidate for---Medical fitness / eyesight test failed---Disability quota---Scope---Petitioner seeking alternative appointment against any other suitable post in Police department, plea of---Legality---Candidate applying on open merit and not under disability quota---Effect---Facts: Pursuant to an advertisement for recruitment of Constables in Punjab Police the petitioner applied on open merit and was provisionally approved by the Recruitment Board but, upon medical examination and expert ophthalmology opinion was declared medically unfit because one eye met 6/6 while the other had reduced visual acuity below the prescribed standard; he was therefore denied appointment---Petitioner filed writ petition which was allowed by Single Judge-in-Chambers directing his appointment, but the Divisional Bench in intra-court appeal set aside that order and required a hearing and speaking order; thereafter, the authority declined his claim on the basis that medical fitness/vision standards under Rule 12.16 Punjab Police Rules, 1934 and relevant Standing Orders were mandatory---Issue: "Whether a candidate declared medically unfit for failing prescribed eyesight standards could be appointed (or alternatively adjusted against another suitable post/considered under disability quotas) despite not meeting the mandatory medical fitness criteria for enlistment as Constable?"---Held: The relevant provisions of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, reflected that medical fitness was an essential and mandatory qualification for enrolment in the police force as per Rule 12.16 which expressly provided that "no recruit shall be enrolled unless he is medically examined and certified physically fit", and further mandated that, having regard to the conditions of police service, the medical examination of candidates must be strict, with rejection required for any disease or defect likely to render a candidate unfit for full police duties---Appendix 12.16 which specifically governed medical examination by medical officers, prescribed stringent eyesight standards, requiring that each eye to independently meet the prescribed visual acuity---The petitioner was declared medically unfit on account of his failure to meet the prescribed visual acuity standards, consequently, the petitioner did not qualify the mandatory medical fitness criteria laid down under the relevant rules, rendering him ineligible for appointment as a Constable---Petitioner was caught between a rock and a hard place as on the one hand he was not certified as disabled by the concerned Board under the Act of 2022 and was found fit for work whilst as per police standards of medical examination he was found unfit for work as a Police Constable---Authorities were directed to carry out a fresh medical examination from another independent hospital for a further opinion on the sight of the petitioner to see if he met all medical requirements in terms of his vision to enable him to be employed as a police constable or any other position within the Punjab Police Service---Under the Police Rules, 1934 the petitioner could not be appointed as a Constable in the Punjab Police Service as he had failed his medical test in terms of not meeting the required threshold for vision and had not been issued a disability certificate and as such Federal Constitutional Court refrained itself from interfering with the recruitment policies of the government which was a disciplined force and which was expected to examine such issue itself---Petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

MUHAMMAD FARHAN vs The PROVINCE OF PUNJAB, through Inspector General of Police, Lahore R — 2026 PLD 114 FEDERAL-CONSTITUTIONAL-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLD