KOCHI: The Supreme Court’s ultimatum to the Central government to grant permanent commission to women officers in the Indian Coast Guard is in line with the court’s view that gender discrimination in whatever form cannot be tolerated. The court’s loud message – that it will issue a favourable order if the government doesn’t – was delivered during the hearing of a petition moved by Indian Coast Guard officer Priyanka Tyagi on February 26.
The bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud rejected outright Attorney General R Venkataramani’s explanation that there were “functional and operational difficulties” in granting permanent commissions to women, saying such excuses won’t wash anymore.
“All these functionality etc argument does not hold water in 2024. Women cannot be left out. If you do not do it, we will do it,” the CJI told the government’s top law officer.
Coast Guard caught off-guard
Petitioner Priyanka Tyagi had an illustrious career with the Coast Guard. She joined as an assistant commandant in 2009 and was promoted to deputy commandant 2015. Tyagi was part of the first-ever all-women crew on Dornier aircraft deployed in 2016 in the Eastern Region for maritime patrolling.
“The petitioner has 4,500 flying hours on Dornier, the highest flying hours as per her seniority in all the forces, including male and female, and has heroically saved over 300 lives at sea,” the petition said.
With such impressive credentials under her belt, she wrote the mid-career professional examination for promotion as commandant and cleared the test, with two of her superiors recommending her permanent absorption in 2021 when she completed 12 years in service.
However, defence ministry officials blocked it saying there is no provision for permanent absorption for women in the Short Service Appointment (SSA) in the Coast Guard.
The petition notes that there was no discrimination between women and male SSAs till November 2009. But on November 13, 2009, the government notified the Assistant Commandant Woman (General Duty) Short Service Recruitment Rules stipulating that “women officers shall not have the option to change over to permanent entry scheme.”
Crux of the matter
The strong words from the court need to be seen in the context of its earlier order directing the government to grant PC for female officers of the armed forces on par with their male counterparts. While considering the case, the SC not only knocked down vapid arguments meant to keep women from being promoted to higher ranks but also addressed the larger issue of institutional gender discrimination arising from a deep-rooted patriarchal mindset.
The court noted the reluctance of authorities to implement gender-neutral policies by hiding behind conventions and long-held beliefs that women are not suitable for certain roles, despite ample proof to the contrary.
Historically, the armed forces were slow to recruit women in its ranks and those inducted faced discrimination in terms of promotion to higher ranks and job security. The Acts that govern the Army, Navy, and Air Force had explicit provisions to keep women out of certain roles. The Central government has the power to override those but conscious efforts were taken only in the early 1990s.
In 1992, the then government introduced the Women Special Entry Scheme (Officers), or WSES, to hire eligible women for specific branches of the Army, such as Army Postal Service, Judge Advocate General’s Department; Army Education Corps; Army Ordnance Corps; and Army Service Corps. Initially, the term was five years.
Later, the government made women eligible for enrolment in regular Army departments such as Corps of Signals, Intelligence Corps, Corps of Engineers, Corps of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering, and Regiment of Artillery. The tenure was also extended to up to 14 years. But there was no scope for PC for women officers.
Long-drawn legal fight
In February 2003, advocate Babita Puniya filed a public interest litigation before the Delhi High Court seeking PC for women SSC officers in the Army on par with their male colleagues. Following this, several women officers from both the Army and Air Force also approached the HC for relief. Their petitions were tagged with that of Babita Puniya.
The main difference between SSC and PC is that the former allows service only up to 14 years while permanent commission allows one to continue till retirement. The consequential benefits are also higher in the latter.
During the pendency of the cases, the defence ministry issued a circular in September 2008 allowing PC to women officers in the Judge Advocate General department and Army Education Corps in the Army and their corresponding branches in Air Force and Navy, with prospective effect.
The circular was challenged before the Delhi HC by Major Sandhya Yadav and others on the ground that it granted PCs only prospectively and only to certain specified cadres.
The HC heard these petitions together and in a landmark ruling in March 2010 directed the government to grant PC to women officers serving in SSC. It also directed the defence ministry to extend the consequential benefits to SSC women officers of Air Force and Army, who had opted for PC but not been granted the same.
The HC set a two-month deadline for the authorities to comply with the order. The Army challenged this in the SC, which refused to set aside the HC order.
In February 2019, the government issued a circular announcing PC to women officers in 10 arms of the Army. But some conditions in the order invited sharp criticism.
For example, women officers were required to indicate their choice of specialisation and intention to opt for PC after completion of three years in SSC, whereas this is 10 years for male officers. This left women officers at a disadvantage because they had to take the call at an early stage with comparatively lesser experience.
Also, the circular said the grant of PC would be restricted to “staff appointments”, which meant less career options for female officers. Also, the grant of PC was limited to those under 14 years of service, with a number of years ahead of them before retirement.
The Supreme Court in its February 2020 order held that every SSC woman officer, regardless of her service tenure, should be considered for grant of PC. The court also struck off the “staff appointments only” reference in the government order.
As for the stage at which women officers have to opt for PC, the court said it will be on the same terms as for the male SSC officers. In both the Delhi High Court and Supreme Court’s orders, the judges displayed absolute clarity in judicial reasoning - that gender discrimination cannot be allowed.
The Coast Guard case is ongoing but the outcome is not hard to guess. The apex court has spoken its mind.
