‘Adversely affected overall merit’: SC slams bias in evaluating women officers for Permanent Commission | India News
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday said the denial of permanent commission (PC) to women Short Service Commission (SSC) officers in the armed forces arose from a flawed and discriminatory evaluation system, particularly the way their performance was assessed.A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and N Koteshwar Singh while delivering its judgment observed that Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) of women officers are often assessed haphazardly, reducing their chances of securing PCs.“Applicants’ ACRs were written on the assumption that they would not undergo career progression. Adversely affect the overall eligibility,” the bench noted, according to Live Law.“The model was rational, non-discriminatory and applied as a 1 time measure. Failure of the respondents to disclose the evaluation criteria etc. has adversely affected the officers,” the bench further said.The ruling comes after a long legal battle in which female officers challenged the criteria used to evaluate them, arguing that it put them at a disadvantage compared to their male counterparts.During an earlier hearing, the Center had denied allegations of bias. It also submitted that after the 2022 approval, women officers are now being recruited through the National Defense Academy, and those who complete the training will be given PCs directly.While earlier reserving its judgement, the bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant was told by Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhatti that structural changes have already been initiated to address gender disparity in the force.The court, however, criticized the assessment process. During the hearing, it questioned why women and men undergoing the same training and assignments were assessed separately.“How can there be two criteria on the basis of gender? Is there a different format for evaluation of SSC female officers and male officers? Is the format different for SSC officers and those on standing commissions?” the bench asked.Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, appearing for the 13 women officers, argued that their ACRs were graded haphazardly and, in some cases, frozen before they were eligible for PC in 2020. In contrast, male officers continued to be evaluated with PC in mindHe pointed to the service records of officers like Lt Col Vonita Padhi, Lt Col Chandni Mishra and Lt Col Geeta Sharma, who served in UN missions, high-altitude areas and counter-insurgency operations. Despite having key operational roles including ‘criteria appointments’ in difficult areas, their contributions were not fully recognized in their evaluation reports, unlike similar postings held by male officers.The Court noted that such differential treatment may violate the constitutional guarantee of equality under Articles 14 and 15 and may reflect ingrained biases within the system. Guruswamy also submitted that several women officers were denied pension and medical benefits commensurate with their service conditions.The petitioners relied on the Supreme Court’s 2020 judgment, which ordered the Army to grant PCs to women officers, saying their exclusion from command roles was unjustified and hindered career advancement.Since then, courts have issued multiple orders expanding PC opportunities for women across the Army, Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard.The matter also involved submissions from serving and retired officers, as the court examined similar concerns across various branches of the armed forces.
