SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 6664

HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
A.S. SUPEHIA, J
MAHENDRA CHAWLA – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 24720 of 2022



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: MR CZ SANKHLA
For the Respondents: No appearance

Candidates must comply with tattoo removal regulations prior to recruitment to qualify for positions in disciplined forces.

Headnote:(A) Article 226 of the Constitution - Writ of mandamus - Denial of appointment to Constable Store Keeper post due to non-compliance with tattoo regulations. Size and location of tattoos as per guidelines must be respected. (Paras 1, 6, 8)

(B) Regulatory Compliance - Requirement of tattoo removal prior to recruitment process established by Ministry of Home Affairs must be adhered to. (Paras 4, 5, 7)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was declared unfit for service due to a tattoo on his right forearm. After removal, he sought reconsideration for appointment in BSF based on new medical advice.

Findings of Court:
The petitioner violated recruitment provisions by having a tattoo during the process and cannot subsequently remedy this post-factum.

Issues: The main issue involved the timing of tattoo removal relative to recruitment regulations.

Ratio Decidendi: Applicant’s claim fails as he did not adhere to guidelines requiring tattoo removal before participating in recruitment.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. writ petition seeks remedy for tattoo-related disqualification. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. regulations on tattoos specified by recruitment guidelines. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court finds no illegality in adherence to guidelines. (Para 6 , 7)
4. writ denied based on failure to comply with tattoo guidelines. (Para 8)
5. final ruling dismisses the petition. (Para 9)

ORDER

1. The writ petition has been filed for the following prayers:

    “6(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to issue writ of mandamus and or any other appropriate writ, orders or directions to the Respondents herein to declare the Petition as FIT in Medical Examination as the Petitioner already undergone to Remove the Tattoo and further be pleased to declare the act of the Respondents as illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory against the petitioner.
    (C) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to quash and set aside the Report dated 18/11/2022 issued by the Respondent no.6 and further direct the Respondent no.5 and 6 to allow the Petitioner to re-conduct Medical Examination afresh.”

2. The petitioner applied for the post of Constable Store Keeper (Male) in Border Security Force (BSF) on 12.07.2022 and cleared all the examinations and thereafter, he was called for Medical Examination on 17.11.2022. It is the case of the petitioner that he has not been appointed in view of a tattoo on his right forearm. After such a report was made by the Medical Board declaring him unfit in view of the tattoo, he thereafter, got the tattoo removed and accordingly, also obtained certificate dated 18.11.2022 from one M/s.Jai Bhole Tattoo. The petitioner was called for Review Medical Examination however, he was declared unfit.

3. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a resident of rural village and there is custom and tradition in the rural areas to get the tattoo on the body and when his case was rejected on the ground of tattoo, he immediately got it removed.

It is submitted that the respondents may accordingly, be directed to consider his case of appointment to the said post since tattoo was only 2/3 cm in size. Learned advocate on the contrary, has submitted that the petitioner has appeared before the Review Committee in view of the suggestion of the Medical Board to undergo the process of removal of tattoo and after he had removed the same immediately within a period of 4 days, he was examined by the Review Board.

4. The petitioner is seeking appointment to the post of Constable Store Keeper in a Disciplined Force such as BSF. The norms are already published by the Ministry of Home Affairs (Directorate General Board Security Force) in the detailed advertisement. The provision with regard to tattoo has been mentioned in paragraph No.D(d), which reads as under:

    “(D) MEDICAL STANDARDS FOR THE POST OF SUB INSPR(TECH) & CONSTABLE(TECH) (d) TATTOO :-
    Content – Being a secular country, the religious sentiments of out countryman are to be respected and thus, tattoos depicting religious symbol of figures and the name, as followed in Indian Army are permitted.
    Location – Tattoos marked on traditional sites of the body like inner aspect of forearm but only left forearm, being non saluting limb or dorsum of the hands are to be allowed.
    Size – Size musy be less than ¼ of the particular part (Elbow or hand) of the body.
    In case of candidate has undergone removal of tattoo (s) prior to appearing for recruitment process and the same has faded substantially, this will be treated as a “scar” and not a tattoo. Such candidate will be permitted to undergo the entire selection process with approval of Presiding officer of the recruitment Board. Further, the scar resulting die to removal of tattoo will be reviewed by the Medical Board of officers during detailed Medical examination.”

5. In the advertisement, the location and size of tattoo are already mentioned. It is also mentioned that in case of a candidate, who has undergone removal process of tattoo “prior to appearing in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top