If women can fly Rafale in IAF, why fewer of them in Army legal branch? SC to Centre

New Delhi: If a woman can fly Rafale fighter jet in the Indian Air Force, then why are fewer women officers in gender neutral posts of Judge Advocate General (legal) branch of the Army, the Supreme Court wondered recently and questioned the Centre’s rationale on a 50-50 selection criterion.

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan on May 8 reserved its verdict on the plea of two officers Arshnoor Kaur and Astha Tyagi, who despite securing 4th and 5th ranks respectively -- higher in merit than their male counterparts -- weren’t selected for the JAG department due to fewer vacancies earmarked for women.

The officers challenged the disproportionate vacancies for men and women and said they could not be selected as there were only three vacancies for women out of the total six posts.

“Prima facie, we are satisfied with the case set up by the petitioner 1 Arshnoor Kaur,” the bench noted while reserving its verdict.

The top court went on, “Accordingly, we direct the respondents to initiate whatever action is required for the purpose of her induction in the next available training course for appointment as Judge Advocate General (JAG)”.

The bench referred to a newspaper article that a woman fighter pilot would be flying Rafale aircraft and said in such a scenario she could be taken as a prisoner of war.

“If it’s permissible in the Indian Air Force for a lady to fly a Rafale fighter jet, then why is it so difficult for the Army to allow more women in JAG?” Justice Datta asked Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, who was appearing for the Centre and the Army.

The top court then questioned the Centre for earmarking fewer posts for women despite claiming the posts to be gender neutral.

The judge said gender neutrality does not mean 50:50 per cent but it means it does not matter from which gender one is from.