Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
Sonu Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Anr. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 7407 of 2023 & CM APPL. 28833 of 2023
Decided On : 26-05-2023
Unfit for Medical Examination - Tattoo Removal Scar - Court directs re-examination by medical board
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was declared unfit for a constable position in the Border Security Force due to an unhealed and unhealthy tattoo removal scar on the right forearm.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the respondents to constitute a medical board and re-examine the petitioner after 15 days, with the report of the medical board being final and binding. If found medically fit, the petitioner would be allowed to join further selection process.
Issues: The issue was the petitioner's fitness for the constable position due to the unhealed and unhealthy tattoo removal scar on the right forearm.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the petitioner's request for re-examination and the interest of justice, leading to the direction for a medical board to re-examine the petitioner.
Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to re-examine the petitioner after 15 days, with the report of the medical board being final and binding. If found medically fit, the petitioner would be allowed to join further selection process.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. Vide this petition, petitioner is praying as under:
"(a) Quash/set aside the Rejection Slip dated 18/05/2023 declaring as illegal and arbitrary in eliminating the candidature of the petitioner in Medical examination due to unhealed & unhealthy tattoo removed & scar over Rt forearm (Saluting Arm).
(b) Direct the respondents to conduct a fresh Medical Board and medically examine the petitioner a fresh and if the petitioner is found fit, he may be considered and given appointment for the post of Constable (Barber) in the BSF with all consequential benefits."
2. Case of petitioner is that respondent No.2 issued an advertisement Notice dated 14.01.2022 for recruitment for the post of Constable (Tradesman) (Male & Female) in Border Security Force for the year 2021- 22. After qualifying PST/PET and Written Examination, petitioner was called for detailed Medical Examination/Review Medical Examination on on 09.05.2023 and was declared unfit for the reason `unhealed Mark on Right Forearm'. Thereafter, petitioner appeared for Review Medical Examination on 18.05.2023 and petitioner was again declared medically unfit due to `unhealed & unhealthy Tattoo removed scar over Rt forearm (Saluting Arm)'.
2.1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the said tattoo has been removed and almost healed. Learned counsel further submits that respondents be directed to re-examine the petitioner herein.
3. Keeping in view the reasons stated in the petition and in the interest of justice, we hereby dispose of the present petition by directing the respondents to constitute a medical board and re-examine the petitioner after 15 days from today.
4. As agreed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the report of the medical board shall be final and binding.
5. We hereby make it clear that in case the petitioner found medically fit, petitioner shall be allowed to join further selection process.
6. In view of above, present petition and pending application stand disposed of.
The court has the authority to direct a re-examination by a medical board in cases where the petitioner's fitness for a position is in question.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the permissibility of tattoos in the context of medical examinations for recruitment, and the court's consideration of the petitioner's removal ....
The presence of abraded lesions from tattoo removal, without evidence of interference with duties, cannot be a ground for declaring a candidate unfit for service in CAPF.
The principle of providing an opportunity for re-examination in cases of medical unfitness due to specific reasons, as established by previous court decisions.
Candidates must comply with tattoo removal regulations prior to recruitment to qualify for positions in disciplined forces.
Uniform recruitment guidelines prohibit tattoos on the saluting arm, impacting a candidate's eligibility; however, the court allows a candidate to seek re-evaluation after tattoo removal.
Compliance with prescribed medical standards is essential for recruitment, yet remedial actions can allow individuals to meet requirements for fitness.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
