The Supreme Court on Monday set aside the Centre's policy that restricted the number of women who can be appointed to the Army's Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch. A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan said that restricting the seats of women is violative of the right to equality.
The bench said the selection should be based only on merit. The top court was hearing a writ petition of two women, who ranked fifth and sixth in merit, and challenged the Army's gender-based vacancy split (six for men, three for women) in the JAG Entry.
"The executive cannot reserve vacancies for men. The seats of six for men and three for women are arbitrary and cannot be allowed under the guise of induction. The true meaning of gender neutrality and the 2023 rules is that the Union shall select the most meritorious candidates. Restricting the seats of women is violative of the right to equality," the bench said.
Justice Manmohan directed the Centre to commission one of the two petitioners into the JAG department. The court found that the second petitioner is not entitled to any relief.
"No nation can be secure if such policies are followed. Union is directed to conduct recruitment in the aforesaid manner and publish a combined merit list for all candidates, which includes men and women candidates," the bench said.
Earlier, while reserving its judgment, the bench noted that it was prima facie satisfied with the petitioner’s case and had ordered her induction. The court had sharply questioned the justification for maintaining a fixed male-to-female intake ratio, asserting that genuine gender parity should be based on merit rather than quotas.
ALSO READ: SC Upholds Medha Patkar’s Conviction In Defamation Case Filed By Delhi LG Saxena
“If women can fly Rafales, why impose limits on them in the Army’s legal branch?” the bench had remarked. In response, the Centre defended the existing system, citing operational demands and wartime deployment considerations.
-1754909654369_m.webp)