Disqualifying bespectacled candidates from work that can be done wearing glasses violates Article 14: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently ruled that a person who has to wear glasses for regular functioning cannot be disqualified from a job an account of poor vision without glasses, when the job description does not specify such visual standards and the work can be done even by wearing glasses (The State of Tamil Nadu and ors. v. M Salai Gayathri and ors)..The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court was recently called upon to settle the issue, after a group of bespectacled candidates were disqualified from being appointed to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police (Technical) and Sub-Inspector of Police (Finger Print) on account of their need to wear glasses .A single-judge of the High Court had earlier allowed the writ petitions moved by these candidates upon noting that the notification issued for the job post did not specify visual standards. .The State challenged this ruling, which was taken up be a Bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Justice S Ananthi The Division Bench framed the issue thus:"Is a person, who could only perform a regular function by wearing glasses would become disentitle to a post he can otherwise perform, by making an assessment qua the eyesight without wearing glasses? (sic)".On February 15, this Bench ruled in favour of the aggrieved candidates, all of whom had cleared the written exam, the physical endurance test and the viva voce round before they were disqualified on account of failure to clear the visual assessment test without wearing their glasses. .The High Court faulted this disqualification, given that it is not the case that these candidates cannot function while wearing glasses nor does the job notification specify the visual standards required. .In any case, it was clear that these candidates could perform the job while wearing their glasses. As such, the Court ruled that their candidature cannot be rejected by making them undergo a test without wearing glasses. ."The question is the suitability to the job and not otherwise. The classification sought to be made is certainly violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India (right to equality). If it is approved, a candidate, who is wearing specs would become disentitled for being considered to the post. It is an indirect way of fixing qualification on the sole premise that a candidate wearing glasses cannot be considered. One has to see the eligibility and suitability of the candidate to the post, but such eligibility cannot be fixed on the basis of a candidate without specs, vis-a-vis, a candidate with specs," the Bench added..The Court further observed that any insufficiency or inadequate eyesight or visual deficiency of the candidates would go once glasses are worn. In such a case, the bespectacled person becomes eligible on par with others performing without glasses, the Bench said. .In such a view, the Court dismissed the State's appeal and directed that the aggrieved candidates be given appointment orders within 6 weeks..[Read Order]