Rajashthan HC calls women's chest criteria for recruitment 'outrageous'

The Rajasthan High Court has vehemently criticized the utilization of chest measurement as a criterion for female candidates in recruitment examinations. As per a TOI report, the court labeled this practice as arbitrary, outrageous, and an infringement on a woman's dignity and privacy. The High Court underscored that such a criterion is in direct violation of the constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21.

Although a single bench, headed by Justice Dinesh Mehta, dismissed a plea by three women who had applied for the position of forest guard - citing the recruitment process had already concluded - it called on the state government to reevaluate this "humiliating" eligibility standard. The petitioners, Om Kanwar, Vandana Kanwar, and Manju Kanwar, contested their disqualification based on chest measurements despite having successfully cleared the physical efficiency test.

In their submission, the petitioners highlighted that their chest measurements exceeded the stipulated requirements. The Rajasthan High Court solicited a report from the AIIMS medical board, which contradicted the claims made by the petitioners. In line with the medical board's findings, the court rejected the petition and upheld the recruitment agency's decision to disqualify them. The order was issued on August 10.


However, the court expressed its discomfort with the current parameter and emphasized the need for thoughtful consideration regarding the necessity of chest measurement for female candidates. The court's order underscored, "The size of the chest and its expansion in case of a female candidate may not necessarily be a pointer of physical fitness and a litmus test of lungs' capacity. Even if it be so, such measurement impinges upon or intrudes the privacy of a female. Apart from being irrational, prescribing such criterion disrupts the dignity, bodily autonomy and mental integrity of a woman."

A copy of the order was directed to the chief secretary, the forest department secretary, and the department of personnel secretary. The court's directive included a call to reassess this criterion and seek expert opinions to explore alternative methods for determining eligibility. This decision reflects the court's commitment to upholding the rights and dignity of female candidates in recruitment processes.