Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.—The following pertinent observation made by Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the matter of Miss C.B. Muthamma v. Union of India and others, AIR 1979 SC 1868. in the context of Indian Foreign Service (Conduct and Discipline), Rules,1961 which prohibits appointment of married woman to such service, aptly and squarely applies to the facts of present case:-

“6. ......Our women is a said reflection on the distance between Constitution in the book and Law in action. And if the book and Law in action. And if the Executive as the surrogate of Parliament, makes rules in the teeth of Part III, especially when high political office, even diplomatic assignment has been filled by women, the inference of die-hard allergy to gender parity is inevitable.”

2. Similarly in the matter of Madhu Kishwar v. State of Bihar, (1996) 5 SCC 125: [1996] 4 Supreme 192. the Supreme Court while taking note of discrimination being suffered in silence by Indian women observed as under:-

“28. .......Self-sacrifice and self-denial are their nobility and fortitude and yet they have been subjected to all inequities, indignities, inequality and discrimination.”

3. Likewise, in t