PEDDINTI SIVA vs INDIAN COAST GUARD THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR GENERAL & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 18891/2025 & CM APPL. 78667/2025 PEDDINTI SIVA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhinay Sharma, Mr. Pooran Chand Roy, Advs. versus INDIAN COAST GUARD THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR GENERAL & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Jagdish Chandra Solanki CGSC, Ms. Aishwarya Shina GP, Mr. Siddharth Bajaj and Ms. Maanya Saxena, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 12.12.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR J. 1. The writ petition voices a grievance against the petitioner having been disqualified for the post of Navik (General Duty) in the Coast Guard on the ground that he was suffering from Gynaecomastia. 2. The petitioner was subjected to a Detailed Medical W.P.(C) 18891/2025 Page 1 of 5 Signature Not Verified Signed By:PREETI Signing Date:15.12.2025 18:32:15 Examination1 on 9 September 2025 and was found unfit for recruitment as he suffered from Stage I Gynaecomastia. 3. The Appeal Medical Examination2 was conducted on the very next date on 10 September 2025 and the petitioner was again found to suffer from Gynaecomastia as a result of which he was disqualified. 4. We are finding, in case after case, the DME and RME are held on one day after the other, as a result of which the findings in the RME nearly in every case are same as the finding in the DME. 5. Even for the most trivial of ailments, there is little likelihood of the symptoms changing in one day. 6. It is true that, in some decisions of this Court, including a decision of our Bench in Deepak v. Indian Coast Guard3, we have noticed that there is no time gap stipulated between the DME and the RME, even though 21 days is granted to a candidate to appeal against the decision of the DME. 7. Nonetheless, we feel that if the RME