The Rajasthan High Court has criticized the practice of using chest measurement as a measure of lung capacity for female candidates during physical examinations in the recruitment process for positions such as foresters or any other role. The court deemed this approach completely arbitrary and offensive, as it undermines the dignity of women.

Furthermore, the Rajasthan High Court has instructed the state authorities to consult experts and consider alternative methods for assessing the required lung capacity. This directive aims to prevent the unnecessary humiliation of female candidates.

The single-headed bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta expressed this viewpoint while ruling on a petition filed by three female candidates. These candidates contested their disqualification based on chest measurement criteria, despite successfully completing the Physical Efficiency Test for the position of Forest Guard.

The court chose not to interfere with the already completed recruitment process. However, it emphasized the need for a thoughtful discussion regarding the necessity of chest measurement for female candidates, whether it pertains to the recruitment of Forest Guard, Forester, or any other position.

In the August 10th order, the judge highlighted that the size of a female candidate's chest and its expansion might not accurately indicate physical fitness or serve as a reliable measure of lung capacity.

"Even if it be so, such measurement impinges upon or intrudes on the privacy of a female. Apart from being irrational, prescribing such criterion disrupts the dignity, bodily autonomy and mental integrity of a woman”, the court stated in its order.

The petitioners informed the court that their measurements exceeded the required standards, prompting the high court to request a report from the medical board of AIIMS.

Nonetheless, the report indicated that two candidates had chest measurements below the necessary threshold under "normal conditions," and one candidate had insufficient chest measurement even in the "expanded condition."

Based on this report, the court dismissed their petitions and upheld the recruiting agency's decision to disqualify them. However, the court expressed objection to the utilization of chest measurements for assessing female candidates.

A copy of the order was sent to the state chief secretary, the forest department secretary, and the personnel department secretary, urging them to reconsider this criterion. The court instructed them to seek input from experts to explore potential alternative methods for determining the required lung capacity.