In a landmark judgment on 17February 2020, the Supreme Court bench comprising of Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi directed that women officers of the Indian Army be considered for grant of permanent commission (PC) irrespective of service tenure, as well as for command posts in non-combat areas.
Government’s Stand
In support of its argument, the government even argued that “troops are not yet mentally schooled to accept women officers in command of units” since they are “predominantly drawn from a rural background”. The statement says it all vis-à-vis Indian society. While modern age has established urban centres that may still follow practices of equality, rural settlements largely continue to exude deeply-rooted patriarchy. Though there have been exceptions to the norm in some states, patriarchy is still conveniently evident in general behaviour and parlance. That perhaps explain the government’s argument.
The rationale presented by the defence ministry to argue is that the military was not just a profession but a “way of life” that required sacrifices and commitment, which women officers would find a challenge “owing to their prolonged absence during pregnancy, motherhood and domestic obligations…” The government went on to argue that soldiers rely heavily on physical prowess in combat and that “inherent physiological differences between men and women” make it a challenge for women to command military units – even non-combat units. The argument against women also cites “minimal facilities for habitat and hygiene” in forward posts. Women, the government goes on to argue “have a negative impact on unit cohesion”.
The only persuasive logic that defence ministry deployed was that changing the terms of women officers’ service from short service commission (SSC) to PC, would militate against the findings of the Ajay Vikram Singh Committee that sought to create a leaner permanent cadre of officers, supplemented by an enhanced SSC cadre, which would serve a few years and then go home without competing for higher ranks. It was calculated that the PC: SSC ratio should be 1:1.1, in order to reduce the army’s worryingly pyramid-like promotion structure. Currently, that ratio is skewed at an unsustainable 3.98:1. The induction of hundreds of women officers from the SSC into the PC cadre will skew the promotion pyramid further.
Supreme Courts Observations
Noting that “the right to equality is a right to rationality”, the Supreme Court paved the way for women in command positions in the Army. The Court observed that an absolute bar on women seeking criteria or command appointments would not comport with the guarantee of equality under Article 14. Implicit in the guarantee of equality is that where the action of the state does differentiate between two classes of persons, it does not differentiate them in an unreasonable or irrational manner. In this sense, even at its bare minimum, the right to equality is a right to rationality.
The bench said that the engagement of women officers in the Army has been an evolutionary process and the Union of India should have acted in accordance with the Delhi High Court judgment when there was no stay on it. There is no reason and justification for the Union of India not to act as per the Delhi High Court verdict. On September 2, 2011, the Supreme Court has clarified this aspect and said there is no stay on the high court verdict. Despite that, scant regard has been paid to the verdict of Delhi High Court and the order of Supreme Court as well.
Background
From 1991 onwards, women officers have received Short Service Commission (SSC) for a service period of 14 years in eight of the 10 services and PC in the Law and Education cadre. In September 2019, the government extended PC to the eight services too but restricted this to only women officers who had been commissioned from 2014 onwards. The order was effective from April 2020. A large number of women officers with SSC from earlier batches continued to serve in the Army beyond their contracted period pending final resolution of a legal case for PC. The Supreme Court has now given finality by granting PC to all women officers, irrespective of year of commission.
In its essence, the court has addressed a petition by a group of 332 women officers challenging the terms and conditions of service imposed arbitrarily by the defence ministry in 2006. In that, the government permitted women to serve for 14 years (as against just five years earlier), but denied them eligibility for PC, which would allow them to continue serving for 20 years, by when they would be eligible for a pension. The SC judgment now allows women officers to opt for PC, whichever stage of service they are at. It also removes the bar the government had imposed on women tenanting command appointments, allowing them to command military units.
Where does the problem lie?
Currently, women are being inducted in the Army through a short-service commission with a service period for up to 14 years. There are 1,653 women officers in the Army, 3.89 per cent of the total number of officers in the Army.
In the Army, first there are Combat Arms: Infantry, Mechanized Infantry, Armoured Corps and also Artillery. Women do not get commissioned into these.
This is followed by the Combat Support Arms: Signals, Engineers, Army Air Defence, Aviation and Intelligence. Women are commissioned in all five as these roles involve limited direct combat with the enemy.
Then comes the Services: Army Service Corps (ASC), Army Ordnance Corps (AOC) and the Electrical and Mechanical Engineers (EME) who in conventional war serve in administrative support roles. Women are commissioned in all three as well.
There are also two other departments: Army Education Corps (AEC) and the Judge Advocate General’s Branch (JAG); Women are commissioned in both; in fact these are only two departments that, from 1992 onwards, have given PC to women officers.
The Army Medical Corps has been recruiting women since long. Although the channel of recruitment to this cadre has been totally different as compared to other cadres, women are already receiving PC in this cadre and also rise up to the ranks including Lieutenant General.
Earlier women were granted permanent commission in the Army’s medical, legal and educational branches. With Supreme Court’s judgment now they will be given PC in cadres to which they are commissioned.
Further, Government’s argument that only women officers with less than 14 years of service would be considered for PC and that those who had reached 20 years of service would be discharged with pension was dismissed by the Supreme Court. The Court’s verdict opens the door for women joining the ranks of colonel and above in the Army Service Corps, Ordnance, Education Corps, Engineers, Signals, Intelligence and Engineering.
Comments
When we speak of equal opportunities, it is important that our understanding of the same cuts across a wide spectrum. If men can hold commanding positions, so should women. The practice of not allowing women to hold commanding positions in the army has perhaps reached its culmination with Supreme Court directive.
The apex court has done well to dismiss this deeply entrenched misogyny with the observation that this is a stereotypical and constitutionally flawed notion and that assumptions about women in the social context of marriage, family and society are not a constitutionally valid basis for denying equal opportunity to women officers.
Another argument that is made is that grant of PC or command appointments to women officers must be based on military needs and organisational requirements, not social considerations or pressure exerted by some groups. The Army, which is heavily deployed along the borders and in counter-insurgency operations, has a limited number of ‘sheltered’ or peace station postings. With more women PC officers occupying such positions, hard or field postings for male officers will be more prolonged.
The judgment has found merit in the argument that the army’s hierarchy must begin accepting women as equal colleagues. It has noted that, over the last 26 years, women officers of all ages and service profiles have been posted to sensitive places, including tough field areas, and that they have performed excellently for the most part. According to the court, women officers brought laurels to the country and won several gallantry and Sena medals as well as UN Peacekeeping awards for their contribution in armed forces. To cast aspersions on them on the basis of physiological features is wrong as it is based on fallacy, the Court said
This issue more often than not has been highlighted as an issue of equality but is rather an issue of similarity. Although there can be no universal solution to the issue because the fact remains that both male and female are not same or similar biologically. However, in terms of humanity, that is measuring in terms of human attributes, both are equal.
But the ongoing battle was more for PC and command positions, rather than combat roles. However, in support services, where women are already inducted, women may be granted equal training and pay as well as pension for providing the same amount of services with same professional competency as men.
An important functional issue is that of command opportunities. If women officers have to be placed in the same category as male officers with PC, with applicability of similar terms and conditions applicable to the latter, then their career management as PC officers has to be addressed. Thus far, under SSC, women officers were denied the requisite training and opportunity to assume command in the rank of Colonel which is the first “selection grade” rank. Male officers of this rank command units of respective Arms and Services but not all are given such opportunity; it is strictly through a stringent selection by a promotion board based upon confidential reports, record of service and qualifications. They are tested in command capability as Colonels and this makes them eligible for further selection for progression to higher ranks. The Indian Army, which is command oriented, tests its officers in command capability before any selection for promotion.
The Army may begin by assigning them command of peacetime establishments such as supply depots and then graduate to operational units. With regard to combat support arms, an experimental exercise must be done to ascertain command capability of selected women officers in both peace and field conditions under close supervision of senior male officers. These units have more manpower and bear operational risks of a higher order, which involves lives of soldiers. JAG and AEC departments where the criterion of testing is different have no such problems.
