E-Paper
‘Outrageous’: Rajasthan HC on chest measurement for women candidates in forest guard exam
The court also said that it is troubled by the “lack of sensitivity exhibited by the administrative authorities while formulating hiring policies and rules”.
The act of ascertaining chest measurements as a criteria, especially for women candidates, for forest guard recruitment is “arbitrary” and “outrageous”, and a clear violation of a woman’s dignity and privacy rights, the Rajasthan high court has observed.
Read here: Govt’s draft SOP seeks restraint from courts in summoning officials
The court also said that the size of a woman’s chest is irrelevant and lacks scientific validity for the purpose of determining her physical fitness, noting that such a criteria is not applied to other government jobs which involve more physical activity.
A single bench of justice Dinesh Mehta was hearing a plea by three women candidates who had cleared the Physical Efficiency Test during the recruitment process but were disqualified for not meeting the stipulated chest measurement norms.
While the bench dismissed the petition on the ground that the recruitment process was over, it directed the state chief secretary, forest secretary and secretary of department of personnel to reevaluate the criteria for chest measurement.
“While the respondents’ assessment of the petitioners does not appear erroneous, this court is deeply disturbed by the parameters set forth by the respondents to determine the physical standards of female candidates. The act of establishing chest measurements as a criterion, especially for female candidates, is unequivocally arbitrary and, to say the least, outrageous. It constitutes a clear violation of a woman’s dignity and her privacy rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India,” justice Mehta said.
“The size and expansion of a female candidate’s chest do not necessarily reflect physical fitness or lung capacity. Even if they did, such measurements intrude upon a woman’s privacy. Aside from being irrational, imposing such a criterion infringes upon a woman’s dignity, bodily autonomy, and mental well-being,” he added.
Since the hiring process is over and all the candidates, including the petitioners, have undergone the test (for chest measurement), the court will not disrupt the completed recruitment, the bench said. “However, a thorough review or observation regarding the necessity of chest measurements for female candidates is essential, whether it is for the recruitment of forest guards, foresters, or any other position,” it said.
Read here: Supreme Court unveils handbook to curb stereotypes based on gender
Expert opinion may be sought to “explore alternative methods for assessing the desired lung capacity level, ensuring the avoidance of unnecessary humiliation for women candidates,” it added.
Justice Mehta said “the size of a woman’s chest, in the court’s view, is irrelevant when determining her strength”. “The qualifying criteria, based on incorrect assumptions that a minimum chest girth guarantees a woman’s physical fitness, lacks scientific validity. This practice is humiliating, derogatory, and an affront to a woman’s dignity. Given that candidates are already required to pass the Physical Efficiency Test, which includes a 1.35-meter Standing Broad Jump and throwing a 4 kg shot put 4.5 meters, the stipulation of a minimum chest circumference appears irrational and unnecessary,” he said.
The court noted that no such test is required for women candidates applying for the post of police constable. “While measuring expansion to determine lung capacity is understandable and acceptable, mandating a ‘minimum chest circumference’ is utterly absurd and cannot be justified,” it said.
“Modern tests are available for this purpose, and if the authorities prefer not to use such methods, they can require candidates to run a specific distance, as the state does for police constable recruitments,” it added.
The court also said that it is troubled by the “lack of sensitivity exhibited by the administrative authorities while formulating hiring policies and rules”.
Read here: Actor-politician Upendra approaches Karnataka HC again against multiple FIRs
“This not only appears to lack scientific foundation but also displays immodesty. Additionally, since the criterion of minimum chest size is not applied to other government jobs that involve comparable or more physical activity, such as police constables, there seems to be no logical rationale behind this particular criterion, especially for female candidates,” it said.
