Emphasizing the crucial difference between civil and paramilitary employment, the Delhi High Court has ruled that personnel in paramilitary forces must be in “optimal physical condition,” calling it a necessity rather than a preference, owing to the extreme demands of the service.
A division bench of Justices C Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul made the observation while dismissing a petition filed by an aspirant to the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP), who was rejected on medical grounds due to the surgical removal of one testis.
“The basic difference between civil employment and employment in paramilitary forces is that the required physical strength is a must,” the court stated in its May 15 judgment. “The respondent’s requirement for the personnel to be in perfect health is not merely a matter of preference but a necessity for operational effectiveness and safety.”
The bench highlighted that paramilitary forces are deployed in high-altitude regions, deserts, and other hostile terrains, where personnel face severe climatic conditions and physical challenges. Given these operational realities, the court said, it is essential for forces to maintain stringent medical fitness standards.
The petitioner contended that removal of a testis did not render him unfit for other military roles, such as in the Indian Air Force, and sought parity. However, the court held that medical eligibility standards vary across services, and one force’s guidelines cannot bind another.
“The medical standards are decided by the respective forces. Therefore, a disease which has not been categorised for the purpose of declaring a person unfit in any paramilitary force/army will not bind such other paramilitary forces to have the same standard,” the court clarified.
Upholding the medical board’s decision, the judges concluded, “We do not find any legal or factual basis to interfere with the decision of the respondents, by which the petitioner has been declared medically unfit for service.”
