The order releasing the petitioner from service on marriage grounds was discriminatory and violated constitutional provisions, leading to its declaration as unenforceable in law.

The petitioner is working as a staff nurse in the Military Nursing Service, for short MNS. Her rank is that of a Lieutenant. The petitioner was granted leave for a period of 52 days in the year 1988. The leave was to expire on the 12th October, 1988. While so, the petitioner received a communication from the third respondent informing her that she has been released from service "on marriage grounds". The leave sanctioned to her also was cancelled and consequently she was ordered to report for duty on the 20th September, 1988 (vide Ext. P1). The only inference possible from Ext. P1 is that her services- were terminated "On marriage grounds" The petitioner thereupon moved this O.P. and prayed for the reliefs mentioned hereunder:

i) to declare that the release from service of the petitioner "on marriage ground" alone is illegal and violative of Articles 14,15,16,19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and therefore, void and unenforceable.

ii) to call for the records leading upto all orders and the communication Ext. P1 and quash the same by the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction.

iii) to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to continue the petitioner in the service of the Military Nursing Service and permit her to rejoin duty as such and further permit her to avail of all the privileges allowable to a member of the Military Nursing Service.

iv) to issue such other writs, orders or directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem, fit and proper in the circumstances of the case".

2. According to the petitioner the above order would result in her being discriminated against in matters of employment under the State. She therefore argues that the order is hit by the prohibition contained in Articles 14,15 and 16 of the Constitution. She has a further case that in any event her right to eke out a living, protected by Article 21 of the Constitution of India, is interfered with by the order. This order, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits, therefore results in the petitioner being deprived of her fundamental rights as a citizen of India, guaranteed by the Constitution. He therefore argues that the order, based on which the above direction is issued that a female nurse in the MNS, on her getting married, will loose her job, is liable to be declared unconstitutional and hence nonest.

3. On a scrutiny of the averments contained in the counter affidavit it is clear that the authority concerned concedes that the service of a nurse in the MNS would get terminated on marriage. At the same time it has been stated that the individual concerned can continue in service provided the continuance is sanctioned by the authority concerned who must be of opinion that the individual possesses the criteria detailed in Annexure 'A' attached to Ext. RI(c) guidelines. A reference in this connection to the following excerpt from the counter affidavit is profitable:-'

" However, due to the persisting shortages in the cadre, a compromise, even temporary, had to be made somewhere and that was how a temporary provision effective for a period of 2 years was introduced in Jan. 1968 to retain the officers of MNS in service even after marriage for a period of 2 years at a time. This provision was reviewed every 2 years till June 1979 when these orders were made to stand "till further orders". Eversince Jan 1968, the married officers of MNS were given the option either to continue in service or seek release on getting married at the end of a two-year period of retention already granted. Under this policy, all those officers who sought release exercising this option were allowed to proceed on release; likewise those who sought continued retention were being granted retention with the rarest of the rare exceptions. It was in early 1987 that the whole policy regarding grant of retention to officers of MNS after marriage was reviewed and it was decided to introduce g set of criteria to be satisfied by