The Centre assured the Supreme Court that women SSC Army officers face no bias in permanent commission, with all policies applied fairly. Women officers, however, argued that despite serving in Galwan, Balakot, and Operation Sindoor, they were overlooked.
New Delhi: The Centre on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that there is no discrimination in granting permanent commission (PC) to Short Service Commission (SSC) women officers when compared with their male colleagues. The government assured the apex court that all rules and parameters are being strictly followed.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan, and N. Kotiswar Singh questioned Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, representing the Centre and the Army, regarding the concerns raised by women officers.
Ms. Bhati informed the court that the government’s policy is being strictly followed in granting permanent commission. Addressing the claims of the women officers who approached the court, Bhati said,
“the annual confidential reports of those officers were actually gender neutral without an element of discrimination.”
The bench emphasized to the ASG that women officers should not feel that they will not be considered for permanent commission, stating,
“women officers should not be made to think that they will not be considered for the permanent commission.”
Responding, Bhati explained that such an impression was being wrongly created, and referred to official statistics since 1991 which, she said, show that
“women officers were not discriminated against their male counterparts.”
She further clarified,
“In the Army, we have been following a very strict regime and there is no question of discrimination, as the selection board does not have the name of the officer before it.”
Regarding the issue of “criteria appointments” or postings in difficult areas, which women officers argued were not being properly reflected in their Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs), Bhati said such appointments were minor and that
“the officers were marked in average in the annual confidential reports.”
She added,
“There are several aspects in the ACR which are considered at the time of grant of permanent commission. Criteria appointment is not the sole criteria which is considered.”
The women officers have contended that despite serving in challenging areas and taking part in key operations such as Galwan, Balakot, and the recent Operation Sindoor, they were not considered for permanent commission.
A criteria appointment usually refers to an officer being posted in a difficult or hostile area or given command during an operation.
Bhati highlighted that the ratio of regular officers to SSC support staff is very uneven compared to the ideal 1:1 ratio.
She also pointed out that “there was a shortage of good officers” and referred to the cap of 250 officers per batch who can be considered for permanent commission, depending on the merit of each SSC officer.
The bench questioned the policy, suggesting that it appeared inconsistent. It pointed out that officers from one batch scoring 80 marks could be selected over other highly capable officers, while in another batch, officers scoring 65 could also be selected.
Bhati’s submissions are set to continue on Thursday.
Earlier, on September 18, the SSC women officers informed the Supreme Court that they were being discriminated against in the grant of permanent commission as compared to male officers, despite participating in significant operations such as Galwan, Balakot, and Operation Sindoor.
Serving and retired women officers told the bench that the Centre had repeatedly failed to comply with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in 2020 and 2021. Some officers attributed the lower intake of women for permanent commission to a shortage of vacancies, while others pointed to discrimination in criteria appointments.
Click Here To Read More Reports on Women SSC Officers
