The standards for medical fitness in recruitment processes set by law enforcement agencies are to be respected, and judicial intervention is limited to cases of clear injustice or bias.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. The petitioner before us, vide the present writ petition, is seeking the following reliefs:

"(a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction setting aside the result of Review Medical Examination of the Petitioner for the post of Head Constable (General Duty), CISF and all subsequent acts/proceedings for selection and appointment to the post of Head Constable (General Duty), CISF pursuant to Notification No. DAVP 19113/11/0005/2122 conducted by Respondent No. 2;

(b) Direct the Respondent No. 2 to conduct the Re-medical of the Petitioner and possible recommendation be made accordingly;"

2. When the present petition was listed on 17.10.2022 for the first time, this Court issued Notice and directed the learned counsel for respondents, appearing on advance notice, to apprise this Court on the next of hearing as to whether any candidate has been selected in the `81 kg above' category in Boxing and also provide a list of candidates who have cleared the Medical Examination in the said category. Today, although the learned counsel for respondents submits that an affidavit in compliance thereof has been filed but the same is not on record. However, the concerned officials connected with the issue involved, who are present in Court, have handed over a photocopy of the affidavit across the Board for our perusal. We have gone through and kept the same for our perusal.

3. As per the facts pleaded, the petitioner, a boxer, claims to have participated and won many medals in various events in weight category ranging from 81-85 kgs. The respondent no.2-Deputy General, Central Industrial Security Force¹ issued a Notification no. DAVP 19113/11/0005/2122 dated 01.01.2022 inviting applications for the post of Head Constable (General Duty) in CISF against Sports quota for the year 2021 in different disciplines including Boxing for 10 different weight categories for `Women' ranging from 48kg to 81kg above with only 01 vacancy in each of the said categories. The petitioner applied for the said post in the `81kg above' category through proper channel and after issuance of Admit Card, was called for sports trial on 28.06.2022 at the CISF Unit IOC Guwahati, Post-Noonmati, Guwahati, Assam. As such, the petitioner went and participated in the said trial.

4. The respondents then issued a list of `provisionally selected candidates' on 28.06.2022 itself including the name of petitioner and called her for medical examination on 08.08.2022 at CISF Unit SSG Greater Noida, Post-Surajpur, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. The petitioner appeared for the same wherein she was declared medically unfit for the reason "Obesity (Ht. 168 cm, Wt.-89 kg, BMI-31.52kg/m3)". Resultantly, the petitioner applied for a Review Medical Examination² within 24 hrs as per Clause 7(f)(vi) of the above-noted Notification. Though the said RME was to be conducted on 10.08.2022, however, due to paucity of time, the same was deferred for 18.08.2022, on which date, the petitioner was again declared medically unfit for the same reason i.e., "Obesity (Ht. 168 cms, Wt.-82 kg, BMI-29.05kg/m3)".

5. Hence the present writ petition for the foregoing reliefs claiming that there was no specific mention in the above-stated Notification that Body Mass Index³ can be one of the reasons for rejection by respondents and further that the action of the respondents was arbitrary as obesity is not a permanent or incurable illness.

6. It is not disputed that the petitioner has been declared medically unfit twice for the same reason, initially when she appeared for the medical examination and then again when she appeared for the RME. Learned counsel for the petitioner claims that the petitioner, being a Boxer, comes from a sports background where everything depends upon fitness, especially as Boxing is a weight related sport. The concerned officials of respondents present in Court today on the other hand submit that the determining factor for sel