Army, IAF told to give women full commission
New Delhi, March 12: In a landmark ruling, the Delhi high court on Friday ordered granting of permanent commissions to 50 short service commissioned (SSC) women officers belonging to both the Army and the Air Force who had accused the government of
gender discrimination. The judgment by a division bench of the court, comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Mool Chand Garg, came on a bunch of petitions by several SSC women officers.
The IAF women officers among the petitioners had contended that the Air Force had promised in a recruitment advertisement that SSC officers would be offered permanent commissions after completion of five years in service and subject to availability of vacancies and suitability of the candidates. They further contended that the IAF had changed the recruitment policy in May 2006, which now states that no SSC officers, whether male or female, would be given permanent commissions. The SSC women officers of the Air Force submitted before the court that they were not given permanent commissions when they applied for it. However, their counterpart male officers working with them were granted permanent commissions, which they said was discriminatory.
The women SSC officers of the Army had also sought permanent commissions. They argued they were being discriminated against vis-à-vis male officers as the latter were granted permanent commissions while they were denied the same despite doing the same work and having equal merit and experience.
In its order, the high court said: “The SSC women officers of the Air Force who had opted for permanent commission and were not granted the same but granted extension of short service commission, and of the Army ... are entitled to permanent commission at par with male short service commissioned officers with all consequential benefits.”
The bench said: “There were also male officers performing the same task. If the male officers can be granted permanent commission while performing those tasks, there is no reason why equally capable women officers cannot be granted PC. It is not a charity being sought by the women officers but enforcement of their own constitutional rights.”
The court rejected the plea of the government that permanent commissions can be allowed only for future recruitment and the benefit cannot be given retrospectively to the serving and retired lady officers who had approached the court.
The court held: “These women officers have served the armed forces of the country well in the areas of operation they were recruited for and have worked in this capacity for 14 to 15 years. They deserve better from the respondents (government).”
The judgment read: “This benefit will be conferred (on) women officers recruited prior to the change of policy. Permanent commission shall be offered to them after completion of five years. They will also be entitled to all consequential benefits, such as promotion and other financial benefits. However, the aforesaid benefits are to be made available only to women officers in service or those who have approached this court filing these petitions and have retired during the course of pendency of the petitions.”
The court asked the Air Force and the Army to take necessary steps, including release of financial benefits, within two months of the passing of this order.
Several women officers in the armed forces welcomed the ruling, which they hoped would end gender discrimination. The counsel for the Army and the Air Force had opposed the contention of the petitioners, and submitted that the matter was related to a policy decision, which was the privilege of the executive.
The defence ministry, as the well as the Army and the Air Force, are yet to react officially to the high court ruling, and sources indicated that the government might challenge the order in the Supreme Court. Sources said there were vacancies only in certain ranks, and that the cadre strength for ranks such as wing commander might not be enough to absorb SSC officers into permanent commission ones.
In September 2008, the government decided to grant permanent commission “prospectively” to SSC officers — both men and women — in non-combat branches of the three services. But serving women SSC officers had pointed out then that the government’s decision would not benefit them as it would be applied “prospectively” (to new recruits) and not with retrospective effect.
gender discrimination. The judgment by a division bench of the court, comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Mool Chand Garg, came on a bunch of petitions by several SSC women officers.
The IAF women officers among the petitioners had contended that the Air Force had promised in a recruitment advertisement that SSC officers would be offered permanent commissions after completion of five years in service and subject to availability of vacancies and suitability of the candidates. They further contended that the IAF had changed the recruitment policy in May 2006, which now states that no SSC officers, whether male or female, would be given permanent commissions. The SSC women officers of the Air Force submitted before the court that they were not given permanent commissions when they applied for it. However, their counterpart male officers working with them were granted permanent commissions, which they said was discriminatory.
The women SSC officers of the Army had also sought permanent commissions. They argued they were being discriminated against vis-à-vis male officers as the latter were granted permanent commissions while they were denied the same despite doing the same work and having equal merit and experience.
In its order, the high court said: “The SSC women officers of the Air Force who had opted for permanent commission and were not granted the same but granted extension of short service commission, and of the Army ... are entitled to permanent commission at par with male short service commissioned officers with all consequential benefits.”
The bench said: “There were also male officers performing the same task. If the male officers can be granted permanent commission while performing those tasks, there is no reason why equally capable women officers cannot be granted PC. It is not a charity being sought by the women officers but enforcement of their own constitutional rights.”
The court rejected the plea of the government that permanent commissions can be allowed only for future recruitment and the benefit cannot be given retrospectively to the serving and retired lady officers who had approached the court.
The court held: “These women officers have served the armed forces of the country well in the areas of operation they were recruited for and have worked in this capacity for 14 to 15 years. They deserve better from the respondents (government).”
The judgment read: “This benefit will be conferred (on) women officers recruited prior to the change of policy. Permanent commission shall be offered to them after completion of five years. They will also be entitled to all consequential benefits, such as promotion and other financial benefits. However, the aforesaid benefits are to be made available only to women officers in service or those who have approached this court filing these petitions and have retired during the course of pendency of the petitions.”
The court asked the Air Force and the Army to take necessary steps, including release of financial benefits, within two months of the passing of this order.
Several women officers in the armed forces welcomed the ruling, which they hoped would end gender discrimination. The counsel for the Army and the Air Force had opposed the contention of the petitioners, and submitted that the matter was related to a policy decision, which was the privilege of the executive.
The defence ministry, as the well as the Army and the Air Force, are yet to react officially to the high court ruling, and sources indicated that the government might challenge the order in the Supreme Court. Sources said there were vacancies only in certain ranks, and that the cadre strength for ranks such as wing commander might not be enough to absorb SSC officers into permanent commission ones.
In September 2008, the government decided to grant permanent commission “prospectively” to SSC officers — both men and women — in non-combat branches of the three services. But serving women SSC officers had pointed out then that the government’s decision would not benefit them as it would be applied “prospectively” (to new recruits) and not with retrospective effect.
Age Correspondent
