LexARSHNOOR KAUR & ANR. versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 1241 : 2025 INSC 954 Arshnoor Kaur & Anr. v. The Union of India & Ors. (Writ Petition (C) No. 772 of 2023) 11 August 2025 [Dipankar Datta and Manmohan,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration (i) Whether after allowing induction of women in a particular corp or branch under section 12 of the Army Act, 1950, can the Respondents by way of a policy and/or administrative instruction restrict the number of women candidates joining the said branch; (ii) Whether the current policy of Union of India with regard to enrolment of women in JAG course is ‘gender-neutral’ or ‘gender-specific’. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Arts.14, 15, 16, 33 – Army Act, 1950 – s.12 – A notification u/s.12 of the Army Act, 1950 was issued for the JAG Scheme 31st Course, qua Short Service Commission (‘SSC’) Course for Law Graduates – The said notification allows induction of women in JAG, and notified three vacancies for female candidates as against six vacancies for male candidates – The notification, further, provides for separate merit list for male and female candidates – In the instant case, Petitioner No.2 (Female) who was ranked 4th with 477 marks (Female Merit List) and Petitioner No.1 (Female) who was ranked 5th with 447 marks (Female Merit List) denied admission in preference to one male candidate who secured third rank with 433 marks in the male merit list – The Petitioners through this Writ petition sought to declare the aforesaid notification as ultra vires Arts.14, 15, 16 and 19 of the Constitution, further publication of a common merit list irrespective of sex of the candidate so as to give effect to ‘gender-neutral’ policy of recruitment in JAG branch – Correctness: Held: Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Indian Constitution form a string of constitutional rights which firmly guarantee the right to equality – The said Articles supplement each other and recognize the right to equality of opportunity to all the citizens in matters * Author 1242 [2025] 8 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports relating to public employment irrespective of religion, race, caste, place of birth or sex/gender – Article 33 of the Indian Constitution carves out an exception to the aforesaid right to equality insofar as it empowers Parliament to modify the Fundamental Rights in their application to members of the Armed Forces – It needs to be emphasised that such restrictions or abrogation must be made by law passed by Parliament – It is by virtue of the power conferred by Article 33 of the Indian Constitution that Parliament has enacted the Army Act, 1950 – Section 12 of the Army Act, 1950 restricts the Fundamental Right of females to join the Indian Army, except in such corps, department, branch or other body forming part of, or attached to any portion of, the regular Army as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf – Upon a harmonious reading of Articles 14, 15, 16, 33 of the Indian Constitution and Section 12 of the Army Act, 1950, no woman is eligible for employment in the regular Army, except in such corps, department, branch or other body forming part of, or attached to any portion of the regular Army as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf – Under Section 12 of the Army Act, 1950, the Respondents had issued notifications on 30.01.1992 (published on 15.02.1992) and 31.12.1992 making women eligible for appointment as SSC officers in the ten streams, including JAG – Accordingly, SSC appointments for women in the above ten (10) streams are limited to Combat Support Arms and Services and not to Combat Arms like Artillery, Armoured Division and Mechanised Infantry – Consequently, this Court is of the view that once the Army permits women officers to join any corps, department or branch forming a part of the regular Army, it cannot impose an additional restriction with regard to ‘extent of induction’ of women officers in the said corps, department or branch — as Section 12 of the Army Act, 1950 does not empower it to do so – Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the impugned notification to the extent that it provides for only three (03) vacancies for female candidates, whereas six (06) vacancies have been notified for male candidates is violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 as well as Section 12 of the Army Act, 1950 – Though men and women candidates during the JAG selection procedure a
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.