New Delhi: According to LiveLaw report, the Supreme Court has reprimanded the Defence Ministry for accusations of unfair treatment and discrimination in the promotion of women Indian Army officers who had been granted Permanent Commission after the landmark Babita Puniya decision.
The report said that a bench consisting of Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice J.B. Pardiwala was hearing applications made by women officers accusing the Indian Army of adopting arbitrary and discriminatory policies while considering promotions, according to LiveLaw.
According to the report, these applications were filed in Lt. Col. Nitisha vs Union of India, in which a bench headed by Justice Chandrachud in March 2021 recognised that the criteria for grant of permanent commission to women officers, although appearing neutral, were indirectly discriminatory.
Gold Rate
22 April 2025
While the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in Babita Puniya declared the Indian Army’s policy of completely excluding women officers from obtaining permanent commission was illegal, it also spawned a new wave of litigation. This culminated in a ruling that the assessment criteria used at the time for granting permanent commission were “arbitrary” and “irrational.” Fresh guidelines were issued, under which applications from female Short Service Commission officers would now be considered, according to LiveLaw.
Women officers in the Army have had to repeatedly approach the court with new allegations of “discrimination and institutional resistance”, according to the report. In a previous hearing, senior advocate V. Mohana told the apex court that women officers were unable to benefit from its decisions. It was alleged that the Indian Army had not conducted selection boards for the promotion of women officers nor complied with the Nitisha ruling. Meanwhile, junior batches of male officers were promoted over their female counterparts, she said.
The Indian Army decided to conduct a special selection board for women officers only after CJI Chandrachud’s bench expressed concern about their unfair treatment and warned of peremptory orders. Applications of around 246 women officers were then considered by the selection board in January 2023.
However, CJI Chandrachud and Justice Pardiwala were told on April 5 that fresh barriers have emerged hindering women’s promotions and command postings. These barriers include the Selection Board’s refusal to consider the latest Annual Confidential Reports (ACR) of women officers, insisting on filling vacancies on a pro-rata basis, and assigning promoted women officers to lead contingents normally led by lower-ranking officers, according to LiveLaw.
The bench was “shocked” at these revelations, according to the report. Directing the defence ministry to file an affidavit in response to these allegations, the bench observed: “On behalf of the women officers, it has been adverted that according to the judgement, overall service profiles of women officers were required to be considered. The submission is that though the ACRs of the women officers based on their entire service profile were required to be considered, they were pegged at the ACRs for 2011, which is when the corresponding male officers in the batch were considered for promotion. ASG states that he would file a proper affidavit explaining this. List after two weeks.”
The CJI warned orally that the ministry may be held in contempt. He told additional Solicitor General K.M. Nataraj, according to LiveLaw:
“We are putting you on notice. If this is not rectified, we will have to come down heavily on you. Because it appears ex facie that there has been an attempt to go around our order. We will now take it very seriously. Tell the authority at the highest level. We want this to be rectified. Next day, if you tell us a different thing, we will have to issue a notice of contempt. Now, we are giving you a last opportunity to set your house in order. Otherwise, we are going to haul you up.”
