SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(SC) 178

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, AJAY RASTOGI, JJ.
The Secretary, Ministry of Defence – Appellant
Versus
Babita Puniya & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos.9367-9369 of 2011 With Civil Appeal Nos.1127-1128 of 2013 And With Civil Appeal No. 1210 of 2020
Decided on : 17-02-2020

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant(s) :R. Balasubramanian, Neela Gokhale, Shradha Agrawal, Ilam Paridi, Arvind Kumar Sharma, Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Anant Vijay Palli, Garima Sachdeva, Nikhil Palli, Deepak Goel, Advocates
For the Respondent(s):Meenakshi Lekhi, Harish Pandey, Jitender Kr. Tripathi, Aishwarya Bhati, Kirti Khangarot, Chitrangda Rastravara, Celeste Agarwal, Nitin Pavuluri, Oorjasvi Goswami, Jaideep Singh, Archana Pathak Dave, Devendra Singh, Vivek Narayan Sharma, Shubham Awasthi, Akash Sharma, Suman Rani, Rajeev Kumar Jha, Pragyan Mishra, Ajay Singh, B. V. Balaram Das, Manider Jit Singh, Hitesh Kumar Sharma, Akhileshwar Jha, Beenu Singh, Advocates

IMPORTANT POINTS
All serving women officers on SSC shall be considered for the grant of PCs irrespective of any of them having crossed fourteen years or, as the case may be, twenty years of service;
The expression “in various staff appointments only” in para 5 and “on staff appointments only” in para 6 shall not be enforced;
SSC women officers with over twenty years of service who are not granted PC shall retire on pension in terms of the policy decision; and
At the stage of opting for the grant of PC, all the choices for specialisation shall be available to women officers on the same terms as for the male SSC officers.
SSC women officers who are granted PC will be entitled to all consequential benefits including promotion and financial benefits. However, these benefits would be made available to those officers in service or those who had moved the Delhi High Court by filing the Writ Petitions and those who had retired during the course of the pendency of the proceedings.

Headnote:

(a) Administration of justice - Interim stay - Of contempt proceedings - Does not mean stay of operation of main judgment. (Para 21)

(b) Constitution of India - Article 33 - Restriction/abrogation of fundamental rights in their application to the members of the Armed forces - By enacting law, if absolutely necessary, to ensure proper discharge of duties and maintenance of discipline. (Para 44, 47)

(c) Army Act 1950 - Section 12 - Engagement of women officers in the Army - An evolutionary process - Policy circular dated 25 February 2019 - Extending engagement of women officers to ten streams of Arms/services - Article 15(1), Constitution of India - Policy circular recognizing insignificance of physiological features of a woman to her equal entitlements - It marks a step towards realising fundamental constitutional commitment to equality and dignity of women. (Para 51, 52, 57)

(d) Army Act 1950 - Section 12 - PC to women officers - Assumptions about women in the social context of marriage and family do not constitute a constitutionally valid basis for denying equal opportunity to women officers - Similarly gender mindset about women being ‘weaker’ sex and putting all burden of family life on them not constitutionally valid - Need for change in mindsets to bring about true equality in the Army. (Para 54, 55)

(e) Army Act 1950 - Section 12 - Union of India not implementing High Court thought only contempt proceeding was stayed by interim order - 10 years elapsed - Union of India taking policy decision not to grant PC to SSC worm officers crossing 14 years of service - No justification. (Para 59, 60, 61)

(f) Army Act 1950 - Section 12 - Policy circular confining grant of PC to SSC women officers in staff assignments only putting an absolute bar on women seeking criteria or command appointments - Would not comport with guarantee of equality under Article 14, Constitution of India - Absolute exclusion of women from all others except staff assignments is indefensible - such restriction directed not to be enforced. (Para 67, 68)

Facts of the case:

A quest for equality of opportunity for women seeking Permanent Commissions [“PC”] in the Indian Army forms the basis of these appeals.

Finding of the Court:

There is no reason or justification to deprive SSC women officers of the grant of PCs on the ground that they have crossed fourteen years of service.

Result: Appeals disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, J

Index

A. Background of the dispute

B. Proposal of the Union of India

C. Submissions

D. Consequence of the policy letter dated 25 February 2019

E. Stereotypes and women in the Armed Forces

F. Consequence of non-compliance

G. Blanket restriction on criteria appointments

H. Directions

A. Background of the dispute

1. A quest for equality of opportunity for women seeking Permanent Commissions[“PC”] in the Indian Army forms the basis of these appeals. The lead appeal originated in a batch of Writ Petitions which were instituted before the High Court of Delhi in 2003 and 2006.

2. A decade and more spent in litigation, women engaged on Short Service Commissions[“SSCs”] in the Army seek parity with their male counterparts in obtaining PCs. The entry of women in the Army has a chequered history. Section 12 of the Army Act 1950, [“1950 Act”] contains, in so far as it is material, the following provisions:

    12. Ineligibility of females for enrolment or employment.-No female shall be eligible for enrolment or employment in the regular Army, except in such corps, department, branch or other body forming part of, or attached to any portion of, the regular Army as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf.”

3. Pursuant to the power conferred by Section 12, the Union Government issued a notification, [SRO-11[dated 30 January 1992 making women eligible for appointment as officers in the specific branches/cadres of the Army. These were:

    “(i) Army Postal Service;

    (ii) Judge Advocate General’s Department;

    (iii) Army Education Corps;

    (iv) Army Ordinance Corps (Central Ammunition Depots and Material Management); and

    (v) Army Service Corps (Food Scientists and Catering Officers).”

This notification was to remain in force for a period of five years from the date on which it was published in the official Gazette. SRO-11 was published in the Gazette on 15 February 1992.

4. By a notification[SRO-1, published in the Gazette on 23 January 1993] dated 31 December 1992, women became eligible for enrollment in the following corps/departments of the regular Army:

    “(i) Corps of Signals,

    (ii) Intelligence Corps,

    (iii) Corps of Engineers,

    (iv) Corps of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering,

    (v) Regiment of Artillery.”

5. The provision for the induction of women for an initial period of five years was extended by a notification[SRO-10(E)] dated 12 December 1996 issued by the Ministry of Defence[“MoD”]. The notification deleted paragraph 2 of SRO-11 under which enrollment was to be for a period of five years.

6. On 28 October 2005, a notification [SRO-121, published in the Gazette on 19 November 2005] was issued by the MoD by which the Union Government extended the validity “of the scheme of appointment of women as officers in the Indian Army”. To facilitate this, four amendments were made to the earlier notification dated 15 February 1992:

    (i) The tenure of women officers inducted under the Women Special Entry Scheme (Officers)[“WSES”] under the notifications dated 15 February 1992, 23 January 1993 and 12 December 1996 was extended by five years from 1997;

    (ii) The tenure of SSC male officers and WSES officers was extended up to fourteen years;

    (iii) The WSES was to cease to apply as a consequence of which women officers were to be inducted through SSC in the corps/services notified by the notification dated 15 February 1992, 23 January 1993 and 12 December 1996; and

    (iv) Substantive promotions were to be extended both to men and women SSC officers “as applicable to PC officers”.

7. Initially, when the WSES was notified under an Army instruction[SAI NO/1/5/92], it was governed by the Terms of Engagement.[“ToE”] Para 1 of the ToE stipulated that commission would be for a period of five years in th


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top