New Delhi : The Supreme Court, which in February pulled up the Centre for having a patriarchal approach in refusing permanent commission to a woman officer in Indian Coast Guard (ICG), on Monday ordered reinstatement of the woman officer in the ICG. The CJI told the Centre’s counsel that initially women were not considered good enough for the armed forces but they joined the Army, became fighter jet pilots, joined the Navy, and now it's turn for the coast guard, and termed it “the march of the nation”.
The apex court directed that the woman officer, who was discharged from service in December 2023, should be assigned suitable posting commensurate with her cadre and qualifications as a general duty officer. The CJI also quipped at the Centre’s counsel for resisting the court’s order in favour of the woman officer. “Look at the resistance in having a single woman in the coast guard. Look at the kind of resistance….”, said the CJI.
A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and comprising justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing a plea by Commandant (junior grade) Priyanka Tyagi whose 14-year tenure as SSA officer ended on December 30, 2023, and was released from service after she was denied any interim relief by the Delhi High Court on December 21, 2023. Senior advocate Archana Pathak Dave, representing Tyagi, submitted that her client has the highest-flying hours as per her seniority in all the forces including male and female, 4500 hours on the Dornier Aircraft, and has heroically saved more than 300 lives at sea.
Dave said Tyagi had completed 13 months of flying training in order to qualify as a navigator. Tyagi, who had joined the court proceedings, became emotional after the court’s order.
The CJI told the Attorney General R Venkataramani and additional solicitor general (ASG) Vikramjeet Banerjee, representing the Centre, “There always torch bearers. We first told women that we will not enrol them at the bar, then Cornelia Sorabji came; then, we told women that they are not good enough to become officers in the Army, then they came to the Army”.
“Then they were not good enough to join the Air Force, they became fighter pilots; then they were not good enough to join the Navy because there were no toilets for women in the Navy, but now they joined the Navy. Now, the coast guard, the march of the nation…”, said the CJI.
The AG argued that the high court passed an interim order and the petitioner came quickly to the apex court and urged the apex court to allow the high court to decide the matter. The same matter is pending before the Delhi High Court.
The AG insisted that the comparison with the Indian Navy and Indian Army is misconceived by the petitioner and the functions of the Indian Coast Guard are very different from the other armed forces, and it is not that ICG is not willing to induct women at various levels. The AG cited the absence of infrastructure and added that it is not a question of permanent or short service entry and urged the court to keep the matter for further hearing next week.
The CJI said we will transfer the petition from the Delhi High Court to the apex court. “The petition which has been filed before the High Court of Delhi, deals with a significant constitutional issue relating to gender equality in the service of the Indian Coast Guard. As regards the Indian Army and Indian Air Force, this court has already rendered judgment resulting in the induction of women in the armed forces on a permanent basis….in this view of the matter having broader constitutional mandate contained in Article 15 of the Constitution, the petition should be heard by this court”, said the CJI, ordering the transfer of Tyagi’s petition from high court to itself.
The petitioner served as short service commission appointee (SSA) in ICG for a period of 14 years till December 2023. The petitioner informed the bench regarding the recommendation made by commanding officers for favourably considering her for permanent absorption in ICG, while pointing at communication dated December 23, 2021, addressed by the commanding officer.
The petitioner also placed another communication December 21, 2021 on the record. Considering the qualification of the petitioner, the CJI said: “we accordingly direct the services of the petitioner to be continued in ICG on the post she occupied on the date of discharge on December 2023, till further order. She shall be assigned suitable posting commensurate with her cadre and qualifications as a general duty officer”.
At this stage, Banerjee said there are also others and the petitioner is benefitting as she has come to court but there would be others who were part of permanent commission in her batch.
The bench said in 2009 when she joined the coast guard that advertisement did not provide an option for permanent commission. “Now, the march of time…”, said the CJI.
The ASG said march of time does not mean someone marches over the others though they were similarly placed. The AG said he is not resisting anything at all and cited issues regarding institutional restructuring. “All these institutional restructuring always ignores equities for…”, said the CJI. The AG clarified that he does not justify anything and he does not think there is any resistance to any gender equality as such.
In February 2024, Dave had told the court her client wanted “to continue in service but they released me in December causing me great prejudice”. “So far no woman SSA officer has been granted permanent absorption as Coast Guard Rules do not permit woman SSAs to change to permanent entry scheme,” Dave had said.
The government, in November 2009, had notified the Assistant Commandant Woman (General Duty) Short Service Recruitment Rules which said that “women officers shall not have the option to change over to permanent entry scheme.”
Tyagi, in the plea, relied on the apex court rulings, which paved the way for equal opportunity for women short-service commission officers in the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force to be considered for permanent commission on par with their male counterparts. Tyagi asked why the same rule did not extend to the Indian Coast Guard, an armed force since 1978.
Read More
