Bar&Bench News Network
That the Indian armed forces had lagged behind their worldwide counterparts when it comes to giving equal status to its lady officers is a foregone conclusion. With India having its first lady President, Speaker and the Women’s Reservation Bill being passed by the Rajya Sabha, it seems the time has finally come for women officers in the armed forces.
The Delhi High Court in a landmark verdict on March 12 has directed the Indian Air Force (IAF) to allow its lady officers to be eligible for the Permanent Commission (PC) status. Currently, women officers are restricted to Short Service Commission (SSC) status, which entitles a maximum service period of 14 years as against a PC officer who is eligible to serve till the age of 60. PC officers are also eligible to various other benefits like pensions, medical and ex-servicemen status.
More than 60 lady officers of the armed forces had filed a writ petition in 2007, questioning this gender discrimination. Rekha Palli (pictured), who has previously represented the Muslim Air Force officer who was terminated for sporting a beard and several other public interest litigations, led the arguments for the lady officers. After 3 years, the Division bench comprising of Justices S.K. Kaul and M.C. Garg, found that not granting PC’s to SSC women officers in the Air Force and the Army amounts to gender discrimination and directed the two defense services to give PC status to all such women officers who were recruited before May 2006.
The Government’s defence included Solicitor General, Gopal Subramanium, who argued that the decision to restrict women officers only to SSC status was a policy decision based on various factors. Apart from the “policy decision” defence, the Government did not present any relevant argument to defend the basis of this discrimination. The court in its order said, “If male officers can be granted PC status while performing similar tasks there is no reason why capable women officers cannot be granted the same. It is not a charity being sought by women officers but enforcement of their own constitutional rights.”
The Indian Air Force had in 1991 placed an advertisement inviting lady officers to join the Air Force, promising that they would be eligible to PC status if they fulfil the eligibility criteria. However after a policy decision in 2006, IAF ruled that PC status could not be granted to its lady officers. The court responded saying that the terms given in the advertisement must be followed and that those women officers who had retired during the course of this case be reinstated and given PC status.
The court in its 32-page judgement noted, “We end this judgment with the hope that with the expanding horizon of women participation in different walks of life, the respondents would be encouraged to have larger participation of women in more areas of operation both for SSC and PC.”
Bar & Bench spoke to Rekha Palli, who has fought several public interest litigations on various aspects of the case:
How it all began:
I was the first one to file a public interest litigation (PIL) in 2003 on various facets of discrimination in the Army and Air Force. But from 2003 to 2007, nothing much transpired. In 2007, one of the lady officers came forward and filed a writ petition and after which several others joined. I took up this matter because I felt what was happening was wrong. The lady officers had gone to several other counsels before they approached me. The other counsels felt that these officers either didn’t have a case or did not believe in their cause.
2003 to 2010:
This case was not about money or pension rights. It was about dignity. Every woman officer, whom I have met during the litigation, was feeling that they were used by the Army and Air Force. Why are we being denied our rights? Even after equal training and rigorous requirements and after you having found us fit and capable. This case was all about that. If this is about infantry or the artillery group I can understand, as the Indian society will take some time to change its mindset. Most of the officers had won awards and commendations, yet they were not granted PC status.
Judgement:
The judges had a very progressive outlook during the entire case. I was telling the lady officers that they are also lucky to have a very learned Bench, which has heard the matter patiently. But I feel that the mindsets of several individuals have to change to accept men and women as equal. One would hope that the above judgment is the first step of a long road ahead in granting women officers a role in the combat areas and being on par with their lady officers around the world.
Reference No: W.P. (C) 3357/2007
|
- 1. "I,appreciate Delhi High Court verdicts for women in defence to enjoy PC. My question : Is it applicable to women officer in Indian Navy who are logistic officer joined during July09.". S.CHAKRABORTY, CHENNAI
- 2. "I must congratulate Rekha Palli, the counsel for the lady officers, Who fought the case and which finally resulted in the landmark Judgement giving equality to the women officers with men, which they have been denied so long.It is indeed an historic judgement. The armed forces utilised the services of these qualified women and threw them out after 14 years on road, when they were most eligible for PC. They were denied pension, medical facilities, rank etc. ". Dr P N GODBOLE, Nagpur
- 3. "I am myself a short service commissioned officer now Released and empolyed in BSF. Indian army specifically and the govt are largely to be blamed for the exploitation of the rights of these women officers. It is sad that it took 21 years for the country to realise that these women have also equal rights as their male conter parts. During the casual talk with the male army officers in the messes, instant disdain and snide comments flowed unabaited. I had many personal arguments with very upcomming officers (from the Indian army standards) regarding the right of equality of these women officers. The Talabanic mind set of the male dominated Indian army Officers Corps was a serious impediment in the process of securing Justice for these women. Once vice chief of the army staff went to the media and declared that army is happy without these women officers. Shame on him!! Is this army his personal Jagir. Well, how the govt could promote him to such a senior position and after this triade why he was not dismissed!!!!SWARN DEV". Swarn Dev, Jammu
- 4. "Being a lady officer who has served in Army for 12 and half years and took premature release in 2008 seeing that Army is not granting PC even after so many conferences on this aspect, I really appreciate the Delhi High court judgement on this case, and congratulate Rekha Palli on this victory for women equility in Army. There had been lot of anamolies in giving same status to women in Army not that they are not posted in high altitude or field or they are not doing the same job as male officers still they had been deprived of same status as male officers. With this judgement i hope it will be new sunrise for women officers in forces because even after extension if they didn't get PC they were not left with any option but to leave midway to find other jobs outside. Now they will have job security ". Major Urmila Nain, Bangalore
- 5. "This judgement is necessary for the equal participation of women not only in a defence sector but in every sectors.If women is doing equal to men thay are eligible to get equal...". Adv. Gourav Kaushish, Australia
- 6. "NOW WE CAN SAY THAT EQUALITY IS COMING BY SOME LITTLE STEPS AGAINST NARROW MIND SOCIETY OF INDIA....BUT WE ARE WAITING FOR A PERIOD WHEN NO ONE WOULD KILL HIS OWN DAUGHTER JUST ON THE BASIS OF GENDER OR SO CALLED REPUTATION...... ". ANIL KUMAR CHAUDHARY, LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA
- 7. "1. my deepest appreciation for Ms Rekha Palli.2. If our politicians after serving only a few years in the parliament or state legilatures are eligible for pension why not women officers after having served(". LT COL SHOBHANA TRIPATHI,AEC, Siliguri
- 8. "I appreciate the landmark judgement and the efforts putforth by Ms Rekha Palli for the cause of lady officers serving in armedforces. The judgement will have positive impact on moral and carrier prospects of women officers in armed forces and Indian society at large.". R K Param, Jaipur
- 9. "PC was stopped in 2006 for all SSC Officers(Gents and Ladies). Due to this many male officers interested in serving have to take release after 11 years of service due to uncertainty of future in Armed Forces. The reason of stopping the PC to all officers in 2006 by defence Services was quite clear,they didn,t want to get into gender discrimination.What happen to those SSC male officers who has to take compulsory release because of this policyMANY ARE STILL INTERESTED TO COME BACK.In case Govt doesnot permit it, won't it be gender discrimination NOW>". Amit, Lucknow
- 10. "I have to make an observation on the comments of Amit from Lucknow. Amit,, if it is true that in 2006 AHQs did not grant Permanent commission to male officers because it amounted to gender discrimination. It is like throwing the baby out with the water after the bath. I feel disgusted to know that I belong to such a country where the army commissioned officers are denied regular commissions because the organisation wishes to be seen as a holy COW. I am not aware this thing could have happened at all. If it has happened Nothing can be more idiotic in a country like India which claims to be a welfare state. Amit, you better ask AHQ if the blanket denial of commissions to SSCOs was related to this gender discrimination business, if AHQ agrees, please file damages suit through an effected party in the court . Are we living in a free country or in some concentration camp in Germany of forties". Swarn Dev, Jammu
- 11. "Dear Swarn,This is a fact which many people are not aware of. Actually, Army was still granting permanent commission and Af stopped it. Just few years before(2004),the policy to grant PC after second tenure was drafted. That is just in two years the policy was reverted back. Why so many changes, Is it not playing with the careers of the officers. The policies are made/changed without going into the ground realities or looking into the after affect. Today you are out because of these policies.All SSC officers in AF was affected, because of this sudden change in the policy and the blame was put on AVSC committe, better growth opportunities for PC officers,faster growth to PC offficers so that they have assured career as SSC officers will peel out after some time and their promotionla chances will increase\\. Why this change in policy took place specifically when lady officer moved to court in 2006 basking for gender biasines. ". Amit, Lucknow
- 12. "Concur with the comments of Amit from LucknowTo all my friends who have written facts about the Army and Air force, i would like to express my experience about Indian Navy which is also not an exception on this issue.Indian Navy has decided to consider males and females of SSC for the grant of PC for the courses who has joined only after January 09.But the courses previous to that are not considered for PC. I don't understand the magic figure of jan 09, probably its a face saving approach by Navy to avoid any conflict on the lines of discrimination and the present situation of army and Af in the supreme court. But what about the previous courses,their future still lies hanging.PC is granted only to the technical branch officer irrespective of any date because there are no ladies in that branch.But the branches where both ladies and males are there Navy is not granting PC even to the male officers because they do not want to again raise the issue of discrimination.So therefore again the future of male officers again with ladies lies in dark.I seriously feel like reacting in some way about this because the officers have given the best of their life to the service and now when it comes to command, the officers are termed useless. ". Sujit, Pune
- 13. "What about those SSC male officers who are not given the opprtunity. They have moved to court, why court for all these issues, why policy makers are not putting their head before taking decision. They have spoiled career of many and know those policy makers should be punished........". Amit, (Unknown City?)
Related Stories
- Arun Jaitley persuades Delhi High Court to dismiss Bayer plea
- Delhi High Court okays ADF
- CJI says no, Delhi High Court differs
- Okaytatabyebye appeal WIPO order in Delhi High Court
- Bayer continues patent linkage battle in Delhi High Court
- Delhi High Court snubs NCPCR; NDTV to continue broadcast of controversial show
- Delhi High Court admits SC's appeal on RTI ambit
Other News
- End of Venture Capital Fund Regulations; SEBI notifies Alternate Investment Fund Regulations
- SILF supports Nariman for President of India; Says no one knows the working of the Constitution better
- Re-Upped Round up May 22
- Supreme Court Lawyers Welfare Trust encourages young talent; Introduces 2 annual fellowships
- Re-Upped Round up May 21
- Clasis Law moves to a larger office space in Delhi
- Re-Upped Round up May 18
The Viewpoint: Indemnification Provisions - Is the fight on the indemnity clause worth the effort?
May 17, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the twentieth article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner AZB & Partners. AZB Senior Associate Nandish Vyas and Associate Pranati Ishwar in this article seek to examine the context in which indemnification rights are relevant for acquisition transactions, and also seek to explore if there are areas where they are potentially not worth the comments (4)










