The petition lodged by two female candidates for Judge Advocate General (JAG) positions, represented by attorney Mandeep Kalra, claims that the January 18 notification reserving six out of nine positions for male applicants deprives women of equal opportunities.
Recently, the Supreme Court took notice of this petition challenging the reservation for male candidates in the newly announced vacancies for JAG positions in the Indian Army. On August 4, Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Pankaj Mithal ordered that the two notified vacancies will remain unfilled temporarily.
The court issued a notice to the Central government, requiring a response within four weeks. The order also directed that two of the vacancies be set aside until the case is revisited after the specified period.
According to the petitioners, they ranked fourth and fifth among female candidates, but they couldn’t secure positions on the merit list due to the quota for males. They argue that the practice of unequal sex-based vacancies violates the non-discrimination guarantee in Article 14 and 15(1) of the Constitution. The petition highlights the existence of sex-based implicit biases in the functioning of the Indian Army.
The petition also pointed out that the notification for ten JAG positions vacant in April next year will divide the positions equally between male and female candidates. Additionally, concerns were raised about the lack of transparency in the selection process, as marks were not disclosed at various stages.
Senior Counsel Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing the petitioner, defended their decision to approach the Supreme Court directly, citing previous cases where the court addressed gender inequality issues in the armed forces.
The court agreed to review the case and notified the federal government to respond to the petition.
