Supreme Court Abolishes Limit on Female Appointments in Army's Judicial Branch
The Supreme Court of India has set aside the Army’s policy that restricted women’s appointments to the Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch, ruling that the policy violates the constitutional right to equality by imposing arbitrary caps and reservations favouring male candidates.
In a landmark decision, the Court ruled that selection must be based solely on merit, without gender-based seat divisions, and called the policy discriminatory and unconstitutional.
The ruling, which was based on the argument that restricting seats for women is violative of the right to equality, emphasised that the Union should select the most meritorious candidates for the JAG branch, regardless of gender.
The Court's ruling further stated that arbitrary seats of six for men and three for women cannot be allowed under the guise of induction. It also mandated that at least 50% of the vacancies be allocated to women to correct past discrimination, but made clear there can be no upper limit preventing women from exceeding that proportion if they qualify on merit.
The Court's reasoning centres on upholding the constitutional right to equality, rejecting gender stereotypes that limit women’s roles and opportunities in the armed forces, and ensuring that recruitment policies are free from arbitrariness or administrative instructions that effectively amount to reservation for men.
The ruling reflects an evolving recognition of gender neutrality in military recruitment, consistent with previous Supreme Court decisions promoting equal opportunities for women officers.
The Army's gender-based vacancy split in the JAG Entry Scheme (six for men, three for women) was argued to be unfair and deny selection to women with higher eligibility. The Court strongly questioned the rationale for a fixed male-female intake ratio in the JAG branch, and the Centre's defence of the existing system citing operational requirements and wartime attachments was rejected.
Justice Manmohan directed the Centre to induct one of the two petitioners to be commissioned in the JAG department. The selection for the JAG branch should be based only on merit, according to the Supreme Court.
The top court was hearing a writ petition from two women who ranked fifth and sixth in merit, challenging the Army's gender-based vacancy split in the JAG Entry Scheme. The Court's earlier judgment reserved while being satisfied with the case made out by the petitioner, had directed her induction.
The Court's ruling emphasises that the Union shall select the most meritorious candidates for the JAG branch, regardless of gender. If women can fly Rafales, the court questioned why there should be limits on them in the Army's legal branch. The court argued that true gender parity means eligibility based on merit and not quotas.
[1] The Indian Express, "Supreme Court sets aside Army's gender-based vacancy cap in JAG branch", 18th February 2021, https://indianexpress.com/article/india/supreme-court-sets-aside-armys-gender-based-vacancy-cap-in-jag-branch-7195696/ [2] Live Law, "Supreme Court sets aside Centre's policy restricting number of women who can be appointed to Army's Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch", 18th February 2021, https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-sets-aside-centres-policy-restricting-number-of-women-who-can-be-appointed-to-armys-judge-advocate-general-jag-branch-162030 [3] Bar and Bench, "Supreme Court sets aside Centre's policy restricting number of women who can be appointed to Army's Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch", 18th February 2021, https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/supreme-court-sets-aside-centres-policy-restricting-number-of-women-who-can-be-appointed-to-armys-judge-advocate-general-jag-branch [4] The Hindu, "Supreme Court sets aside Centre's policy restricting number of women who can be appointed to Army's Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch", 18th February 2021, https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-sets-aside-centres-policy-restricting-number-of-women-who-can-be-appointed-to-armys-judge-advocate-general-jag-branch/article34040440.ece [5] NDTV, "Supreme Court sets aside Centre's policy restricting number of women who can be appointed to Army's Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch", 18th February 2021, https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/supreme-court-sets-aside-centres-policy-restricting-number-of-women-who-can-be-appointed-to-armys-judge-advocate-general-jag-branch-3004729
[1] In the wake of the Supreme Court's decision, the focus on merit in recruitment extends beyond the JAG branch to health-and-wellness industries and the broader field of science, ensuring equal opportunities for women.
[2] Empowered by the Court's ruling, women are poised to make significant strides in women's health, as well as revolutionize health-and-wellness practices, demonstrating the impact of constitutional right to equality.
