Supreme Court Critiques Indian Army's Gender-Based Recruitment Policy

The Supreme Court has deemed the Indian Army's policy of reserving more JAG vacancies for men than women as 'arbitrary' and a violation of the right to equality. The court instructed the government to include one of the two female petitioners in the JAG department and to publish a joint merit list for both male and female candidates.

While delivering the verdict, Justice Manmohan stated that the executive cannot reserve vacancies for men under the guise of appointments. The policy allocating six seats for men and only three for women in the JAG (Judge Advocate General) department was labeled as arbitrary and contrary to the 2023 recruitment rules. The bench, comprising Justice Manmohan and Justice Deepankar Dutta, emphasized that the executive cannot reserve positions for men. The allocation of six seats for men and three for women is arbitrary and cannot be justified under the pretext of inspiration. The court asserted that the true meaning of gender neutrality and the 2023 rules is that the union should select the most meritorious candidates. Limiting seats for women infringes upon the right to equality. The bench directed the government to conduct recruitment in a gender-neutral manner and to publish a combined merit list that includes both male and female candidates. The court stated that this reflects the true essence of gender neutrality by selecting the most deserving candidates regardless of gender.

The court ordered the inclusion of the first female petitioner in the JAG department but denied relief to the second, citing her qualification status. The court reiterated that limiting seats for women violates the right to equality. Such policies undermine fairness and compromise institutional integrity.