The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition filed by an Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force (ITBPF) candidate who had passed the PET/PST (Physical Efficiency Test/Physical Standards Test), written test and documentation, and practical (skill) test for the post of constable (Driver) under the OBC category, but was later declared unfit due to a tattoo on his right arm.
The division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Navin Chawla observed that,"the stipulation of disqualification of a tattoo on the right arm is a classification that is based on an intelligible differentia, and the intelligible differentia has a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved, namely, that the tattoo is visible while saluting."
The petitioner, on the other hand, contended that the tattoo mark on the petitioner's right arm is his own name, that it does not cause any prejudice to anyone, and that it is within the permissible limits as set out in the rules.
The court determined that the petitioner was ineligible for the post of constable (Driver) under the OBC category, as stated in clause 4.4(iv) (b) of AdvertisementNo.2/2018:
"Minimum Medical Requirement: (iv)Tattoos:
(a) Content: As a secular country, our countrymen's religious sentiments must be respected, and thus tattoos depicting religious symbols or figures, as practised in the Indian Army, are permitted.
(b)Location: Tattoos on traditional sites on the body, such as the inner aspect of the forearm, but only the left forearm, which is not a saluting limb, or the dorsum of the hands, are permitted.
(c) Size: The size must be less than 14 of the specific body part (Elbow or Hand)."