The Supreme Court today invoked Article 142 and asked the Indian Navy to consider a woman officer’s Permanent Commission afresh. Article 142 allows the top court to pass any order necessary to do complete justice in any case or matter pending before it.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India Today(26 Feb) took a decisive step by invoking Article 142 to address the case of a woman officer in the Indian Navy who was previously denied a Permanent Commission. This move not only highlights the court’s proactive stance in rectifying perceived injustices but also sets a precedent for the treatment of similar cases in the future.
The case came to the forefront when a special bench, led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and comprising Justice Hima Kohli, heard a series of petitions regarding the grant of Permanent Commissions to short service commission officers in the Indian Navy. The bench’s decision to invoke Article 142, which grants the Supreme Court the authority to pass any order necessary to do complete justice in any case, underscores the significance of this case in the broader context of gender equality and justice within the armed forces.
The court’s directive was clear and unequivocal:
“We clarify that pursuant to AFT (Armed Forces Tribunal) directions, if a proportional increase in vacancy is required to be created to accommodate petitioner, this shall be carried out without creating precedent. We direct so under article 142 to see long-standing justice is met out to the petitioner without displacing anybody. Any ACR which petitioner is not aware of will not be relied upon. Should the petitioner is aggrieved by any orders, she is at liberty to pursue her remedies in accordance with law.”
This case revolves around a woman officer who was commissioned into the Indian Navy as a Short Service Commissioned Officer (SSCO) on August 6, 2007, and subsequently rose through the ranks within the Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch. Despite her promotions and extensions in service, she was informed on August 5, 2020, that she would be released from service, sparking the legal battle for her right to a Permanent Commission.
The Supreme Court’s intervention was partly motivated by the Navy’s reliance on a 2008 policy letter to deny the officer a Permanent Commission, a stance that was challenged in court. Chief Justice Chandrachud remarked,
“Having concluded thus, this court directed that policy letter of 2008 being prospective was quashed and set aside. A significant direction issued was that women SSCOs in education, law cadres would be considered for the grant of PCs. This entitlement arose from the policy letter. It is not in dispute that the case of woman to be granted for PC (Permanent Commission) arose from the decision of this court.”
The court’s decision to order the reconvening of a selection board to consider the woman officer’s case afresh, particularly as she remains the only serving JAG officer from her batch, is a testament to the judiciary’s resolve to ensure that justice is not only done but is seen to be done.
This ruling not only addresses the specific grievances of the petitioner but also sends a strong message about the importance of fairness, transparency, and equality in the armed forces’ commissioning processes. It reaffirms the Supreme Court’s role as a guardian of constitutional rights and values, ensuring that every individual, regardless of gender, is given a fair chance to serve their country to the fullest extent of their abilities.
ALSO READ
Supreme Court Advocates for “Nari Shakti”: Emphasizes Permanent Commission for Women in Coast Guard
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
