Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 7073
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, Om Prakash Shukla, JJ
SHRUTI VYAS & ORS. – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA THROUGH & ANR. – Respondent
W.P.(C) 1106/2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Indra Sen Singh, Mr. Nasir Mohd, Ms. Kaberi Sharma
For the Respondents: Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG, Mr. Satya Ranjan Swain, CGSC, Mr. Amit Gupta, SPC, Major Anish Muralidhar, Capt Carolin Johnson, Mr. Kautilya Birat, Mr. Ankush Kapoor, Mr. Vishwadeep
The court affirmed the constitutional right to gender equality in military recruitment, directing the allotment of unfilled male vacancies to women candidates.
Headnote:(A) Army Act, 1950 - Section 12 - Gender neutrality in recruitment - Petitioners sought directions for recruitment into SSC officers (Non-Tech) in Indian Army, claiming unfilled vacancies for male candidates should be allocated to women; the court cited principles of gender neutrality per Supreme Court ruling in Arshnoor Kaur. (Para 45 - 50)
(B) Fundamental Rights - The petitioners' entitlement to the same number of vacancies as male candidates was confirmed; the restrictions based on gender were deemed unconstitutional; the court emphasized the importance of securing fundamental rights in recruitment policies.
(C) Writ of Mandamus - Court directed the petitioners' consideration against 62 unfilled male vacancies, affirming that there was no constitutional basis to limit women's recruitment numbers. (Paras 7.9, 10, 11)
(D) The court reaffirmed its obligation to uphold the Supreme Court’s declarations to ensure gender-neutral opportunities in the armed forces.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners seek inclusion in army recruitment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. claim of unfilled vacancies by petitioners. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. clarification of gender neutrality principles. (Para 7) |
| 4. court emphasizes rights based on gender equality. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. court allows petitioners to apply for remaining vacancies. (Para 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
16.09.2025
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
1. The petitioners are young girls who desire to join as Short-
Service Commissioned, [“SSC” hereinafter] Officers (Non-Tech) in the Indian Army.
2. The Union Public Service Commission, [“UPSC”, hereinafter] issued an Examination Notice on 4 August 2021 inviting applications from candidates who desire to join the Army via the Combined Defence Service Examination (II) 2021, [Signature Not Veri3f i“eCdDSE”, hereinafter]. Among the posts, to be filled by the CDSE, were SSC Women (Non-Technical) Posts, to which the petitioners aspire. For recruitment to the SSC, the Examination Notice notified 169 vacancies for men and 16 vacancies for women.
3. The petitioners are seven in number. Of these, Petitioners 5 and 6 have been selected and are presently undergoing training. Mr. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, therefore, the lis survives only qua Petitioners 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7, [collectively, “the petitioners”, hereinafter]
4. The petitioners cleared the examination following their applications for the SSCW (NT)5. The petition also sets out their respective scores in the examination but we do not deem it necessary to make reference thereto. Suffice it, however, to state, of the 169 notified vacancies for men, only 107 vacancies have been filled whereas all 16 vacancies reserved for women have been exhausted. There are, therefore, 62 vacancies earmarked for men which remained unfilled.
5. The petitioners stake their claim to these 62 vacancies. The prayer clause in the petition reads thus:
“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to:-
a) Issue a writ of ‘Mandamus’ thereby commanding and directing the Respondents to assign/allot the same number of vacancies for the women candidates equal to the vacancies allotted/assigned to male candidates for short- service-commission; Or, in the alternative, at least the same number of vacancies sanctioned by the Government of India as intimated vide the RTI Reply dated 01.09.2023
(Annexure P-10, Pg 355);
b) Issue a writ of ‘Mandamus’ thereby commanding and directing the Respondents to issue call-up/joining letters to, and allow, the Petitioners to join the pre- commission training at Officers Training Academy (OTA) Chennai along with SSC-32 course of Women which has commenced on 03.10.2023; Or, in the alternative, the next SSC (Non-Tech) course for Women , i.e. SSC-33 (NT) or SSC-34(NT), which will commence in March 2024 & October 2024 respectively or any other subsequent similar course;
c) Issue a writ of ‘Mandamus’ thereby commanding and directing the Respondents to grant age-waiver in respect of Petitioners who have attained/will soon attain 25 years of age which, as per Respondents’ existing policy, is the maximum age limit to join pre-commission training at Officers Training Academy at Chennai /for commission in the Indian Army as Women SSCO; and
d) Pass such other directions/orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
6. Mr. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the dispute in issue is no longer res integra as it stands covered by paras 45 to 50 of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Arshnoor Kaur v UOI , [2025 SCC OnLine SC 1668]
7. Arshnoor Kaur
7.1 As Mr. Chetan Sharma, learned ASG, correctly submits the exact dispute before the Supreme Court in Arshnoor Kaur related to induction of women into the Judge Advocate General7 Branch of the Army. The appellants before the Supreme Court had applied consequent to a Notification dated 18 January 2023 for the 31 corps of the JAG stream to b
