Delhi High Court Bats For Gender Neutrality In Army Recruitment, Directs Consideration Of Women Candidates For Unfilled Men's Posts
The Delhi High Court has granted relief to five young girls wanting to join as Short-Service Commissioned Officers (Non-Tech) in the Indian Army, saying that elimination of “anachronistically artificial chromosomal distinction” between women and men is a cherished constitutional goal. A division bench comprising Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla directed that the...
The Delhi High Court has granted relief to five young girls wanting to join as Short-Service Commissioned Officers (Non-Tech) in the Indian Army, saying that elimination of “anachronistically artificial chromosomal distinction” between women and men is a cherished constitutional goal.
A division bench comprising Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla directed that the five petitioners be considered against the 62 unfilled vacancies of men, as there could have been no limitation on the number of women who could be entitled to recruitment against the corps and services.
“Needless to say, however, the petitioners would not be entitled for induction into any other corps or services, other than the corps or services, which are identified in para 45 of the decision in Arshnoor Kaur,” the Court said.
The Bench allowed the plea filed by seven women who had applied to the post of SSC Women (Non-Technical), in which 169 vacancies were for men and 16 vacancies were for women.
Out of the seven petitioners, two were selected and were undergoing training. The matter thus pertained only regarding the remaining five candidates.
Of the 169 notified vacancies for men, only 107 vacancies were filled whereas all 16 vacancies reserved for women were exhausted. A total of 62 vacancies earmarked for men remained unfilled.
Petitioners had sought directions for allotment of same number of vacancies for the women candidates as are allotted to male candidates for SSC.
Granting relief to the women candidates, the Bench referred to the Supreme Court ruling in Arshnoor Kaur case and said that it was clarified that Section 12 of the Army Act only empowers notification of corps or services into which women could be inducted and does not thereafter permit restriction of the number of women who could be inducted there into.
The Court said that it is the constitutional duty of every executive and judicial authority to act in aid of the Supreme Court, adding that the same would include ensuring that the law declared by the Apex Court, especially where it is aimed at social emancipation and in which public interest is deeply ingrained, is implemented to optimum effect.
“Elimination of the anachronistically artificial chromosomal distinction between women and men is a cherished constitutional goal, and the Supreme Court has, especially in recent times, been, through one judicial pronouncement after another, been pushing the envelope to the maximum possible extent. We have to carry the torch forward,” the Court said.
Furthermore, the Bench said that the Supreme Court is not merely the arbiter of disputes and ultimate interpreter of law but also functions as the sentinel on the qui vive, as the supreme guardian of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution of India.
“Among the most pristine of these fundamental rights is the right to gender neutrality. In the discharge of its functions as the sentinel on the qui vive, the Supreme Court is unshackled by considerations of the limits of the lis before it. Where the Supreme Court lays down the law on matters of policy, gravely impacting fundamental rights, it would be folly, on the part of any Court, to restrict it to the lis with which the Supreme Court was concerned,” it added.
Disposing of the plea, the Court ordered that if there are any pre-training formalities such as medical clearance which are required to be fulfilled, the petitioner women candidates would be required to fulfil them before undergoing their training.
“Needless to say, should the petitioners qualify and be selected, they would be entitled to all other consequential reliefs as available in law,” it said.
Counsel for Petitioners: Mr. Indra Sen Singh, Mr. Nasir Mohd and Ms. Kaberi Sharma, Advs
Counsel for Respondents: Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with Mr. Satya Ranjan Swain, CGSC, Mr Amit Gupta, SPC with Mr. Kautilya Birat, Mr. Ankush Kapoor and Mr. Vishwadeep, Advs
Title: SHRUTI VYAS & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1134