Supreme Court Overturns Gender-Restricted Army Policy for Women in JAG Branch
The Supreme Court has overturned a policy of the Indian Army that limited the number of women officers eligible for the Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch, declaring that selection should be based on merit rather than gender.
The ruling was delivered by a bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan, who determined that dividing vacancies by gender and allocating a larger portion to male candidates violated the right to equality. The Court pointed out that the policy, which allowed for only three posts for women compared to a higher number for men, did not adhere to constitutional principles.
The bench stated that the Executive cannot impose limitations or make reservations for male officers under the pretext of recruitment policy or administrative instructions. It emphasized that according to Section 12 of the Army Act, 1950, women are allowed to join branches such as the JAG, whose main role is to give legal counsel to the Army.
The judges highlighted that the selection criteria and testing standards for both male and female officers in the JAG branch are the same, and their service conditions do not vary. Consequently, the Court ordered the Union Government to allocate 50% of JAG vacancies to women, stating, “No nation can be secured by only one half of its population.”
This ruling is regarded as a significant move towards achieving gender equality in the armed forces, consistent with the Court's earlier decisions that have expanded opportunities for women in the military.
