‘Colour blindness not a disability’: Gujarat court questions government over forest guard’s sacking
Justify with scientific material how colour blindness affects duties attached to the post, court tells govt
Noting that colour blindness is not a disability, the bench demanded scientific proof and research showing how the condition prevents someone from effectively patrolling a forest. (File) The Gujarat High Court on Thursday orally questioned the state government over the termination of services of a forest guard after it was found that he has a partial colour vision defect, asking authorities to justify with scientific material and research how colour blindness affects the performance of duties attached to the post.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice D N Ray was hearing a petition filed by Jitu Baraiya, who had challenged his termination from service after being appointed as a forest guard in January last year. Baraiya’s advocate, Mamta Vyas, submitted that he was sacked after two months of having served in the post following his selection in January 2025.
During the oral submissions on Thursday, the court noted that the recruitment process commenced through an advertisement issued in 2022. The petitioner cleared the selection process and was issued an appointment order on January 21, 2025. He joined duty and worked for nearly two months before being sent for a medical examination, following which authorities found him to have a partial colour vision defect and terminated his services.
Orally questioning the basis of the decision, the court observed that colour blindness and vision defect are different and sought an explanation from the state on how the condition renders a person incapable of performing the duties of a forest guard. The court orally asked the government to place on record the material, research, studies or expert reports relied upon to conclude that persons with colour blindness cannot effectively discharge the functions of a forest guard.
The court orally asked, “Colour blindness is not a disability… According to you, it affects the working of a forest guard. You have to explain how. Where is the research for that? And if, in the forest, as a forest guard, you can identify green, brown, white and yellow, that is enough…”
The bench orally asked if the state had undertaken any exercise to identify specific duties that a person with colour blindness would be unable to perform. The court also took note of the fact that the petitioner had been found to have only a partial colour vision defect and observed that the state had not specified the exact nature or extent of the condition. The bench orally said that partial colour blindness may merely involve difficulty in identifying certain colours and questioned whether that alone could justify exclusion from service as a forest guard.
Referring to a 2023 Supreme Court judgment, the court orally indicated that issues relating to colour vision deficiency and employment had already been considered by the apex court and sought the state’s response in light of that ruling. The bench, orally, also asked the state to clarify the rules relating to colour blindness in Forest Guard recruitment prior to 2016 — when the rules relied upon by the Government Pleader had come into effect.
The court orally directed the state government to research the issue and place its response on record. The HC will next hear the matter on Monday, when the government is expected to file its reply.
Share
