• News
  • India News
  • 'If women can fly Rafale, why fewer of them in Army legal branch?': SC questions Centre's 50-50 selection criterion

'If women can fly Rafale, why fewer of them in Army legal branch?': SC questions Centre's 50-50 selection criterion

The Supreme Court has questioned the central government about the under-representation of women in the Judge Advocate General branch of the Army. This came after a petition by female officers who were not selected despite high ranks. The court questioned the 50-50 selection criterion. The court also compared the situation to women flying fighter jets in the Air Force.
'If women can fly Rafale, why fewer of them in Army legal branch?': SC questions Centre's 50-50 selection criterion
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the Centre over less female representation in the Judge Advocate General (legal) branch of the Army scrutinising its 50-50 selection criterion. A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan last week reserved its verdict on the petition filed by officers Arshnoor Kaur and Astha Tyagi. Despite securing 4th and 5th ranks respectively — ahead of their male counterparts — the two were not selected for the JAG department due to the limited number of vacancies allocated for women."If it's permissible in the Indian Air Force for a lady to fly a Rafale fighter jet, then why is it so difficult for the Army to allow more women in JAG?" Justice Datta asked the Centre.During the proceedings, the bench was informed that the second petitioner, Tyagi, had joined the Indian Navy. Taking note, SC questioned the Centre on its rationale for allocating fewer posts to women despite asserting that the positions were gender-neutral.
In response, additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati argued that the induction and deployment of women officers in the Army, including the JAG branch, was part of an evolving, progressive process aligned with the force's operational requirements."To say the policy of intake of men and women officers from 2012 to 2023 in the ratio of 70:30 (or now being 50:50) as discriminatory and volatile of fundamental rights would not only be incorrect but will also transgress into domain of executive which is the only competent and sole authority for deciding the intake of men and women officers in Indian Army," she said.SC questioned the Centre’s claim of gender-neutral recruitment after it was revealed that women candidates with higher merit were overlooked due to vacancies still being divided by gender. Justice Manmohan remarked that true gender neutrality means selection should be irrespective of gender, not a rigid 50-50 distribution. He further asked whether all ten women would be appointed if they qualified for the JAG branch purely on merit. Defending the existing policy, ASG Aishwarya Bhati stated that gender-specific vacancies exist across all Army branches, determined by operational needs and manpower assessments.
author
About the Author
TOI News Desk

The TOI News Desk comprises a dedicated and tireless team of journalists who operate around the clock to deliver the most current and comprehensive news and updates to the readers of The Times of India worldwide. With an unwavering commitment to excellence in journalism, our team is at the forefront of gathering, verifying, and presenting breaking news, in-depth analysis, and insightful reports on a wide range of topics. The TOI News Desk is your trusted source for staying informed and connected to the ever-evolving global landscape, ensuring that our readers are equipped with the latest developments that matter most."

End of Article
Follow Us On Social Media