In a big win for women officers in the Army, the Supreme Court on Monday said that the Centre was obligated to grant permanent commission to women officers after the judgment of the Delhi High Court in 2010. It also said that Centre’s reply on the matter violated principles of equality.
“Centre waited for nine years before coming out with a notification in 2019 allowing permanent commission to women in eight streams. The Centre’s policy decision of 2019 recognises that physiological features has no role in allowing permanent commissions to women officers,” the court said.
The curt further said that the lines of submission were disturbing. “Despite policy decision, the Centre submitted a note to the Supreme Court which perpetuates sex stereotypes. Arguments by the Centre founded on physical strength of men and women and grounds of motherhood, family etc violates equality,” the court read. The bench continued that casting aspersions on ability of women and their role and achievements in Army is an insult not only to women but also to Indian Army.
The defence ministry had challenged a 2010 judgment of the high court which had ruled that short service commissioned women officers in the Army and Air Force should be granted permanent commission. The court, which is considering the issue of giving command position to women officers in the Army after grant of permanent commission, had recently said the government has to look at the matter “very differently”.
Also Read: No role or scope for third party mediation: MEA rejects UN sec-gen’s offer to mediate on Kashmir
The Centre had earlier submitted a written note to the SC, that contained a proposal of the government. The note explicitly pointed out ‘differences’ in men and women based on “physical prowess” and “physiological limitations” and said that these are limitations that do not make women officers meet the exigencies of service in the Army.
“…the profession of arms is not only a profession but a way of life which often requires sacrifices, commitment beyond the call of duty by the entire family of service personnel involving separation, frequent transfers affecting education of children and career prospects of spouse. As a consequence, it is a greater challenge for women officers to meet the hazards of service owing to their prolonged absence during pregnancy, motherhood and domestic obligations towards their children and families especially when both husband and wife happen to be service officers”, the Centre’s note stated.
It also added that it is best to keep woman away from direct combat since capture of a woman officer or soldier as a prisoner of war would lead to a situation of extreme mental, physical and psychological stress for the captured individual and the government.
The Centre had also added that units have their own peculiar dynamics as they are made entirely of male soldiers, mostly from a rural background. The note said that such units were not “mentally schooled to accept women officers in command of units”.
The Centre also said that the lower physical capacity of women officers will be a challenge for them to command units wherein officers are expected to lead the men from the front and need to be in prime physical condition to undertake combat tasks.
This received major out lash especially from women officers who called this “regressive” and “completely contrary to the demonstrated record and statistics”. They said that they have been serving for the last 27 to 28 years and have proven their mettle and courage under fire.
The written submission, taken on record, said that women officers have demonstrated that they do not lack in any manner in the roles that have been assigned to them. Today’s Supreme Court decisions will go a long way in upholding the position women officers deserve.