E-Paper
SC allows women army officers to challenge promotion policy
The army had argued in the past that an officer must meet the “essential eligibility criteria” of minimum two confidential reports (CR) in colonel select rank
The Supreme Court on Monday allowed women officers alleging discrimination in promotion to challenge the policy introduced last month by the Indian Army for promotion to the rank of brigadier and closed proceedings in a pending application seeking gender-neutral standards to be adopted by the selection board in considering their case for promotion vis-à-vis their male counterparts.
“Now that there is a policy in place, the challenge to it must be heard in an appropriate proceeding,” a bench headed by chief justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud said. It was due to the court’s prodding that the army introduced a policy on March 29 titled “Future Career Progression Policy for Women Officers” empaneled for promotion as brigadier by selection board - 2 (SB-2).
Disposing the application filed by nearly 30 women colonels, the bench, also comprising justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said, “If the petitioners are aggrieved by the policy dated March 29, they will have to take remedies as per law. We are not entering into merits absent any procedure as per law. The application is disposed.”
Attorney general R Venkataramani appearing for the Centre along with senior advocate R Balasubramanian appearing for the army shared a copy of the new policy and said future promotions by SB-2 will be governed by this policy. “Large number of relaxations have been granted to the women officers and large number of them have been promoted,” Venkataramani said. “You cannot keep asking for relaxations.”
He further stated that so far, the army only had a policy of November 2021 governing promotions from lieutenant colonel to colonel (SB-3). In December, the court gave time till March 31 for the army to come out with a policy governing SB-2.
The women officers, who have benefitted from the two Supreme Court rulings in the past in the Babita Puniya case (2020) and Nitisha case (2021), have come a long way through fighting for their due rights in the army, which has faced criticism from the top court for its patriarchal mindset.
Senior advocate Archana Pathak Dave, appearing for the women officers, told the court that the new policy suffered from the same flaws as seen in the Nitisha judgment. Explaining the objections to the March 29 policy, a response affidavit prepared by the officers said the policy required them to undergo a mandatory higher course for two years. These courses, according to them, were usually taken in the 6th or 12th year of service and most of the officers have undergone almost 19 years of service.
Dave told the court that the officers will prefer to file a writ petition challenging the policy. Colonel Sarika Pendalwar, assisting Venkataramani in the matter, submitted to the bench that out of the army’s total strength of about 49,000 officers, 150 colonel vacancies have been provided to women officers out of the total of 5,995 posts. The affidavit of the women officers claimed the policy left no scope for their future career progression from brigadier to major general, thus making the policy regressive in its approach.
The army had argued in the past that an officer must meet the “essential eligibility criteria” of minimum two confidential reports (CR) in colonel select rank as any deviation from this fundamental eligibility criteria will amount to compromising with the operational requirement of the army. Further, for promotion to brigadier, an officer must have operational command of a unit or battalion for 18 to 24 months.
Venkataramani had told the court that while the problem raised by the women officers pertained to the pre-2005 batch, making an exception for the present set of petitioners could have long-term repercussions.
