While observing that a male candidate has more physical strength, the Allahabad High Court dismissed petitions challenging different criteria for male and female candidates for their physical efficiency test in the Excise Constable recruitment process.

The Bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery observed that "…difference of criteria of physical efficiency test is based on physical strength of a male and a female as in number of research papers it has come that in a normal situation male has more physical strength than her female counterpart."

"In the present recruitment, females have succeeded in huge numbers and it appears that unsuccessful male candidates are not able to cope up with the fact that female have overnumbered them in merit. It is an example of 'male chauvinism' which is unacceptable in twenty first century.", the Bench remarked.

The facts leading upto the case was that the Petitioners participated in recruitment process to the post of 'Excise Constable' where the criteria for male and female candidates for physical examination was determined on different yardstick.

Petitioners remained successful in the physical efficiency test. Anticipating that they would not be selected in final merit list, petitioners approached Allahabad High Court.

Soon thereafter, the final result was declared, and as expected, they could not find a place in the merit list.

In the writ petition, it was prayed to quash the criteria of physical efficiency test contemplated which was against Article 14, 15 and 16 (2) of Constitution. It was further prayed to quash the final result also.

Senior Advocate Ashok Khare appeared for the petitioners whereas Advocate Siddharth Singhal appeared for the Subordinate Services Selection Board.

The High Court noted that the petitioners had participated in the recruitment process having complete knowledge of different criteria of physical efficiency test for male and female, however, when they anticipated likely to be unsuccessful in final result, they approached the Court.

"…petitioners are estopped from challenging recruitment process as well as physical efficiency test being different for male and female after they have participated therein with open eyes. Their act of turn around to question criteria of recruitment process is therefore impermissible.", the Court held.

The Court further observed that in a number research papers it was found that in a normal situation male has more physical strength than her female counterpart.

The Court held that the argument challenging the criteria of female for physical efficiency test was not only without any legal basis but was also against women empowerment.

Accordingly, the Court rejected the arguments against different criteria for male and female candidates for their respective physical efficiency test and therefore dismissed the petitions.

Cause Title- Pramod Kumar Singh and Ors v. State of U.P & Ors.

Click here to read/download the Order