The Supreme Court frowned at the “arbitrary” at the consideration of the “appointment of criteria” for the Army officers for short services (SSC), who were looking for a permanent commission compared to their male counterparts.
The “appointment of criteria” means an officer who gave the command of a contribution in a difficult and enemy area or surgery.
Also read | After SC RAP, the Center agrees to award the Permanent Commission to Officers of Women’s Army
Justices Surya Kant, took Bhuyan and N Kotiswar Singh, while heard a request of 13 officers of the army of women who questioned them by the permanent commission, questioned how there could be two parameters for men and women who undergo the same training and contributions.
“How can two gender -based criteria exist? Is there a different format for the evaluation of female officers and male SSC officers? Is this format different to SSC officers and those who are in the permanent commission?” The bench asked according to the PTI report.
“Damaged by occasional classification”
The leader of Maneka Guruswama, who appeared for 13 officers, along with the advocate Amrita Panda, said the petitioners were damaged by occasional sorting, although they had completed the same training and contributions as their male counterparts.
“This sorting was the result of a subjective assessment made at a time when it was not eligible for a permanent commission (PC). Unlike male officers whose performance was continuously assessed with regard to PC, ACRS subordinated in 2019 before the court decided for women in 2020.”
She pointed out that among the 13 officers she represented, Lt Col Vanita Padhi was sent in a UN peacekeeping mission in Congo, Lt Col Chandni Mishra was the first pilot in 88 countries to flew a maneuver and air target (near Pakistans in Pakhrista (close to Pakhoor (near Pakhoor Pakhoor).
Guruswamy said that among officers, Lt Col Geeta Sharma, he served as an “criterion” appointment as an officer commanding communication for “Operation Galwan” in Ladakh; LT Col Swati Rawat as an officer commanding workshop for “Operation Sindoor” and LT Col Swati Rawat in the Basuli Basuli area from Jammu and Kashmir and LT Col vanita Padhi as Commander of the company in Firozpur, Pandjab border area during the Sindoor operation.
Also read | Daredevil Rescue caught on CAM: The Indian Army will save 25 people from the falls of the house
“Unlike their male counterparts, however, their (female officers) ACRS did not reflect it as” the appointment of criteria “. For male officers, ACR was categorized as “criteria reports” for such meetings, and an explicit mention of appointment is “the appointment of criteria” that is considered to be a PC, “she.
Justice Singh asked if it means that for female officers it does not matter where they are published, but for male officers, publishing in difficult areas is considered to grant the Permanent Commission.
“Yes,” Guruswamy replied, adding, “Women, despite the fact that they organized identical appointments, were issued ACR, which were” reports on non -emergency “without mentioning the appointment of” criteria “because they were not eligible for PC.”
He said that the Tribunal of the Armed Forces (AFT) itself decided that the criteria reports have more weight into considerations on the PC than report reports of Neretiteries. Justice Kant asked Guruswamy whether the assessment of the criteria for appointment for the permanent commission arbitrarily.
“Yes. It is violated by Article 14 and Article 15, and therefore arbitrary,” she submitted, adding that the fact that women have these positions, where there are boundaries, controversial or fragile regions, it means that they trust women but did not give them a permanent commission.
Justice Kant said that this problem seems to be caused by “conservative thinking” and “perception” of some higher officers.
Guruswamy said he did not receive any pension, medical contribution, and the situation was that one of the commanders who brought the aircraft back from Balakot was asked to leave a week later.
Hearing continues today
Hearing remained inconclusive and will continue today
The bench heard pleas of the serving officers and those who were released from the army service. The best court stated that there will then be supplements filed by maritime officers, followed by officers in the Air Force, who were also damaged by the rejection of the PC.
On August 6, the Supreme Court was informed that the female and male officers of the Indian army include two unequal and different classes and cannot be considered as a permanent committee as the same criteria and cutting off.
Also read | What does India need to maintain longer wars? Says Army chief Ubendra Dwivedi
The officers relied on the verdict of the 2020 top court, which the army was ordered to give them a permanent commission.
In its 17th February 2020, the Supreme Court stated that the absolute exclusion of women from all positions, with the exception of employees’ tasks, was uncontrollable in the army and their blanket of the unconscious to appoint command could not be maintained by law.
This problem seems to be caused by “conservative thinking” and “perception” of some higher officers.
The Top Court, which allowed a PC for female officers in the army, said that the absolute ban on female SSC officers to obtain anything else, but apparently the appointment of employees did not fully fulfill the purpose of granting the PC as a means of career advancement in the army.
Since the 2020 judgment, the Supreme Court added several orders on the question of the permanent commission to female officers in the armed forces, and similar orders were adopted in the case of the Navy, Indian Air Force and Coast Guard.
(Tagstotranslate) Supreme Court (T) Permanent Commission (T) Women Army Officers (T) Appointment of criteria
