Birthmarks vs. Disease: Court Slams CISF Recruitment Medicals

A division bench of justices sharply rebuked the CISF for disqualifying candidates for constable positions based on what the court deemed minor or inconsequential medical conditions. The judiciary questioned the force's medical assessment protocols, particularly regarding the inability to distinguish between birthmarks and curable ailments like fungal infections. This intervention came after three aspirants from Hingoli were rejected during the selection process for Central Armed Police Forces and other agencies.

The court quashed the Detailed Medical Examination and Review Medical Examination reports from November and December. The candidates, Mangesh Patange, Vishnu Dhone, and Vaibhav Panjarkar, had cleared the physical efficiency tests but were declared medically unfit. Medical specialists had opined that their conditions, including hyperpigmentation and a benign fungal infection, were not disqualifying.

Lawyers for the aspirants argued that these disqualifications violated uniform guidelines, which listed specific grounds for unfitness. The judges expressed dismay at the rejection of potentially meritorious candidates, emphasizing the need for accurate medical evaluations. While critical, the court refrained from imposing costs, accepting assurances that such issues would be avoided in future recruitments.