Can't reserve posts for men: Top court slams 'arbitrary' male-female quota in Army branch

India Today

11-08-2025

The Supreme Court on Monday struck down the 2:1 reservation policy for male and female officers in the Indian Army's Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch, ruling that vacancies cannot be reserved for men or restricted for women. The court called the practice "arbitrary" and a violation of the fundamental right to equality."The executive cannot reserve vacancies for men. The seats of six for men and three for women are arbitrary and cannot be allowed under the guise of induction," a bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Dipankar Datta said.advertisementThe court affirmed, "The true meaning of gender neutrality and 2023 rules is that Union shall select the most meritorious candidates. Restricting the seats of women is violative of right to equality".
Hearing a petition challenging the restriction of women to half the available seats, the bench further remarked that "no nation can be secure if such policies are followed" and directed the government to conduct recruitment and publish a combined merit list for all candidates, including both men and women."To compensate women for their previous non-enrollment, the Union of India shall allocate not less than 50 per cent of the vacancies to women candidates. However, to restrict women to 50 per cent of the seats... despite being meritorious than the male candidates is violative of the right to equality...," the court further said.The top court refused to agree with Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati's contention that JAG posts are gender-neutral and that a 50:50 selection ratio has been in place since 2023.The JAG branch of the army, or the Judge Advocate General's Corps, is the legal arm of the military. Its members, known as judge advocates, are lawyers who serve as officers in the army. They provide a wide range of legal services to the military, including commanders, soldiers, and their families.Two women candidates seeking appointment to the post challenged the disproportionate allocation of vacancies, arguing that although they ranked 4th and 5th, higher than several male candidates, they were not selected due to the limited vacancies reserved for women. The court directed that one petitioner be inducted into the service, while denying relief to the other, who had joined the Indian Navy during the pendency of the petition. - EndsTune InMust Watch