Delhi HC Directs Re-Examination Of CAPF Assistant Commandant Applicant To Assess Healing of Tattoo Removal Scar
The Delhi High Court directed authorities to conduct a re-examination of the concerned applicant for the post of Assistant Commandant in CAPF to assess whether his scar from tattoo removal surgery has healed or not.
The Court instructed the re-examination by the New Medical Board after he was declared unfit because of the unhealed scar from the tattoo removal surgery.
The bench of Justice V Kameswar Rao and Justice Ravinder Dudeja observed, “As such, this Court in the exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 is of the view that the appropriate shall be that the respondents conduct re-examination of the petitioner’s right forearm through a new Medical Board and come to a conclusion, whether the scar on the right forearm pursuant to removal of tattoo continues to be unhealed and unhealthy or has completely healed leaving no residue of tattoo.”
Brief Facts-
The petitioner, Akshay Choudhary, argued that the Union of India issued an advertisement for the post of Assistant Commandant in CAPF. Despite undergoing tattoo removal surgery, the petitioner was deemed unfit due to a tattoo mark during a subsequent examination. After applying for a Review Medical Examination, and undergoing another surgery, the petitioner was again declared unfit, due to an unhealed scar. A follow-up examination done by the doctor of the petitioner showed no residue of the tattoo. Petitioner challenged the previous assessment.
The Court noted that strictly there exists no tattoo post the tattoo removal surgery, and also the Tattoo Clause does not stipulate that if a scar after removal of a tattoo is unhealthy/unhealed, the same would lead to disqualification of a candidate.
However, the Court further noted that there was a cogent purpose for the Medical Board / Review Medical Board to examine the scar after the surgery to ensure that the visible part of the hand while saluting is clear in all respects. According to the Court, the conclusion of the Review Medical Board to that extent may be justified.
The Court said, “the Review Medical Board should not have examined the petitioner immediately after a few days of surgery and should have given sufficient time to the petitioner to ensure the healing of the scar and then decide the fitness/unfitness of the petitioner.”
The Court said that prima facie it appeared that the scar might have healed as is evident from the photograph of the right forearm as well as the opinion sought by the petitioner from a skin specialist who opined that no residue of a tattoo can be seen and 2-3 sittings, would be needed for complete clearance of post-laser hyperpigmentation.
Finally, the Court said if the view of the Medical Board is in favour of the candidate then the respondents shall, subject to the availability of the vacancies in the grade of Assistant Commandant (Group A) take further action in respect of his appointment to the post of Assistant Commandant.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the petition.
Cause Title: Akshay Choudhary v. Union of India (Neutral Citation: 2024: DHC: 4080-DB)
Appearance:
Appellant: Adv. Pankaj Mehta
Respondent: CGSC Abdhesh Kumar, Chaudhary, GP Chetan Jadon, Adv. Shivangi Jadon and Adv. Hemlata Singh
