The Delhi High Court, in a significant ruling, has held that a candidate applying for a position in a disciplined force, such as the Delhi Police, must be given an opportunity to remove any disqualifying tattoo before being permanently rejected from the recruitment process. The ruling was made in the case of Staff Selection Commission & Ors. vs Bhupendra Singh (W.P.(C) 12949/2024), where the Court upheld the principle of fairness while balancing the strict requirements of service in the police force.
Background of the Case
The case arose from the recruitment drive for Constable (Executive) Male and Female in the Delhi Police, 2023, conducted by the Staff Selection Commission (SSC). Bhupendra Singh, the respondent, applied for the post and successfully cleared the Computer-Based Examination as well as the Physical Endurance and Measurement Test (PE & MT). However, during his medical examination on January 18, 2024, he was declared medically unfit due to the presence of a tattoo on his right forearm, which was his saluting arm. The Review Medical Examination conducted on January 20, 2024, confirmed this disqualification.
Singh challenged the medical disqualification in OA No. 889/2024 before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi. He argued that despite scoring well above the cut-off and clearing all other tests, he was denied a fair chance solely due to the tattoo, which could be removed. On April 22, 2024, the Tribunal ruled in his favor, directing that his case be governed by a previous decision in a similar case involving Deepak Yadav vs. SSC & Ors. Dissatisfied with the Tribunal’s decision, the SSC filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court.
Key Legal Issues
1. Medical Disqualification for Tattoos: The primary legal question in this case was whether a candidate could be permanently rejected due to the presence of a tattoo on a saluting arm, as explicitly prohibited by the Delhi Police Standing Order dated April 8, 2022 and the SSC’s recruitment guidelines.
2. Opportunity for Rectification: The second issue was whether candidates, otherwise fit for recruitment, should be given a chance to rectify the disqualifying condition—in this case, the removal of the tattoo—before final rejection.
3. Precedents from Similar Cases: The Tribunal’s decision rested heavily on a precedent from the Deepak Yadav case, where the court held that tattooed candidates could be given a specific timeframe to remove the tattoo and proceed with the recruitment process.
Court’s Observations and Decision
The division bench, comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Girish Kathpalia, delivered the judgment, dismissing the SSC’s petition and confirming that Bhupendra Singh should be given the opportunity to join the Delhi Police after removing the tattoo.
During the hearing, the Court noted that Singh had already undergone surgery to remove the tattoo. The judges personally inspected Singh’s forearm and confirmed that the tattoo was no longer visible. Consequently, the Court determined that Singh was otherwise eligible and should not be denied his rightful place in the recruitment process.
In a key observation, the Court referenced its earlier ruling in the Deepak Yadav case:
“When any candidate having a tattoo on his/her forearm and entering in the selection process of any Force, including Delhi Police, which is objectionable to the Selection Board; then opportunity has to be granted to such a candidate to get the tattoo removed, within a time-bound manner. Despite, if he or she still does not get the tattoo removed, his or her candidature is liable to be rejected.”
The High Court also cited the judgment from the Rajasthan High Court in Union of India vs. Sanyogita, which emphasized that tattoos should not automatically lead to disqualification unless they compromise discipline or the image of the force. The judgment stated:
“Tattoo marks are not only distasteful but also distract from good order and discipline in the force. However, there is no absolute prohibition in having a tattoo mark.”
Based on these legal precedents and Singh’s removal of the tattoo, the Court found no reason to uphold the SSC’s rejection of his candidacy.
The Delhi High Court upheld the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal and directed the SSC to allow Bhupendra Singh to join the Constable training program scheduled for November 2024. The Court ruled that since Singh had removed the tattoo, he met all eligibility criteria and should be given the opportunity to serve in the Delhi Police.
Parties and Representation
– Petitioners (SSC & Ors.): Represented by Mr. Sushil Kr. Pandey, Senior Panel Counsel, and Ms. Neha Yadav, Advocate, along with SI Vikash Kumar.
– Respondent (Bhupendra Singh): Represented by Ms. Esha Mazumdar, Mr. Setu Niket, Ms. Unni Maya S., Mr. Ishan Singh, and Ms. Chetna, Advocates.
Case Number: W.P.(C) 12949/2024.
