Tattoos are not fascinating always, weightlifter Davinder Kaur realised the travail when she applied for a head constable job in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) early this year under the sports quota. She was declared medically “unfit” twice by the CRPF’s medical boards for wearing a tattoo on her right forearm.

Kaur removed her tattoo and approached Delhi High Court seeking a direction to the CRPF to reconsider her candidature given that the only objection in qualifying for head constable (general duty) in the category of weightlifting (59kg) was over.

“Accordingly, In the interest of justice, we hereby direct the respondents to examine the petitioner afresh before the freshly constituted Medical Board of the respondents within four weeks from today and if the petitioner is found fit by the said Medical Board, she shall be allowed to join further selection process,” Justice Suresh Kumar Kait wrote the two-page judgement for the double Bench on May 16.

The Delhi High Court Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Mini Pushkarna, however, made “clear, as agreed by learned counsel for petitioner, that if the petitioner is found unfit, the said decision shall be final and binding”.

According to the petition, Kaur sought quashing of “memorandum of unfit” issued to her on January 25, 2023, for having tattoo marks post Review Medical Examination (RME) conducted by the CRPF. She went on an appeal after she was rejected on the same ground following Detailed Medical Examination (DME) conducted on January 23.

“Now the case of the petitioner is that tattoo on the arms and hands have already been removed and that she should be given an opportunity to participate in the examination,” the Court observed while citing two earlier judgements where liberty was granted to aggrieved persons.

CAPFs have took a stand that it is barred under the Union Home Ministry recruitment rules.

Two precedents

In another petition, Justice Kait, sharing the double bench of Delhi High Court with Justice Saurabh Banerji, directed the authorities in 2021 to reconsider the job application for a constable post in Central Armed Police Forces provided he removes religious tattoo in dorsum of his right hand and was found fit on all parameters.

In the same year, another double Bench of Delhi High Court of Justices Manmohan and Navin Chawla went by the Indo-Tibetan Border Police’s (ITBP’s) decision to declare a candidate unfit for a constable (driver) post in the force, again for sporting a tattoo on his right arm.

“This court is of the view that the stipulation of disqualification of tattoo on the right arm is a classification that is based on an intelligible differentia and the intelligible differentia has a rationale relation to the object sought to be achieved, namely, that the tattoo is visible while saluting,” said Justices Manmohan and Chawla.

Related Topics