Table of Contents
What is Permanent Commission in India
A Permanent Commission in Indian Defence Services indicates that a person may serve in the Defence Services until he/she retires, unlike the SSC. The SSC officers are the people who come into action for a brief period of time, usually lasting from 7-14years until they have to retire. SSC officers are not given the annuity or post-retirement canteen facilities. Individuals are recruited as SSC officers into the Defense Services, and they may qualify for the Permanent Commission to meet the essential requirements after a predefined period.
But that is not the case for women officials; Section 12 of The Army Act, 1950{1] unambiguously renders females ineligible for a permanent role in the Army. Such discriminatory sections are also contained in the Navy Act, 1950, and the Air Force Act, 1950 respectively, which are not only derogative to women but also violates the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of sex enshrined in Article 15(1) of the Constitution of India.
The induction process and the qualifications required for both men and women to be SSC officers are the same and they do have similar post-enlistment responsibilities as SSC officers. However, when it comes to opting for PC, women are denied their basic right to seek equal opportunities in public employment[2]. They have been left in the lurch without pensionary and promotional benefits at par with their male counterparts despite having dedicated prime years of their lives to the service of the nation. All things considered, the Supreme Court’s recent judgment to grant women officials, in all parts of the Defense Services, the permanent commission has brought a new ray of hope.
The question remains, are the Citizens of India ready to change their outlook towards these issues with the new legislation?
Past Developments
The army has just 3 per cent women, the Navy 2.8 per cent, and the Air Force with 8.5 per cent performs best. India has one of the worst recruitment records in the world in the Defense Forces, for instance, worse than immediate neighbours Pakistan, Nepal, and Sri Lanka.
-
January 30th, 1992
The Indian Army began to recruit women in non-medical positions. These included employment in the education, law, food catering, and logistics sectors. However, this had a hidden agenda behind it. In 1991, India’s gender record was under scrutiny by recently made UN Agencies as a result of which the obnoxious bar on women’s recruitment in Non-Combat roles was withdrawn and women were recruited as SSC officers for a period of 5 years, as was issued in the government notification
However, later the duration was extended to 14 years due to their outstanding quality and lack of staff. But, though all women were exempted from duty not long after 14 years, men were given raises, and additionally, PCs were often provided in the same branches and jobs where women had previously served[3].
-
February 2003
A Writ Petition was instituted by Babita Puniya before the Delhi HC to grant PC to Women SSC Officers in the Army in the form of a Public Interest Litigation[4]. The PIL recommended that they are not eligible for a pension that includes 20 years of service due to the short service period of 14-year for old female officers.
Men enrolled as SSC officers alongside the female officers were given PCs after five years of service, but the female officers were just given five or six years of augmentation to keep them in service. Babita Puniya represented 50 women officer written petitions in all three divisions – Air Force, Navy, and Army.
-
July 2006
“Women Special Entry Scheme” (WSES) recruits had a shorter pre-commission training period than their male counterparts, which essentially stood in their way of being qualified for PC. The WSES scheme was replaced with the SSC scheme in 2006, which was a striking advancement towards gender equality.
But even now women officers could not opt for the Permanent Commission at the end of 10 years of service. Notwithstanding, the Defense Ministry issued an order in September 2008 announcing that PC would be given to the Advocate General and Army Education Corps.
-
March 2010
The above judgment was challenged on the grounds that PC was granted prospectively and only in specific cadres. Therefore, Delhi HC passed an order stating that women SSC officers will be entitled to PC at par with their male counterparts.
Revision of Women’s Legal Age for Marriage
This order was challenged by the government and despite the fact that the judgment has not stayed; the Ministry of Defence did not execute these orders.
Recent Developments
Ten years of relentless struggle and sacrifices by courageous women officers finally bore fruit in February 2020, when the Supreme Court upheld the 2010 Delhi HC judgment stating that women officers in the Defense Services must be granted PC by the Central Government irrespective of their years of service. Primary takeaways of the Judgment[5] were:
- In its judgment, Delhi HC had only made those women eligible for PCs who had not yet completed 14 years of service. Officers with more than 14 years but less than 20 years of service were only furnished with augmentation in order to attain the 20-year pensionable service limit.
SC emphasized the “fundamental fallacy” in making this distinction and directed all female officers to be considered for PC “irrespective of the length of service.”
- The judgment also featured availing to women “command” positions as a result of which women officers would now be able to fill in as Commanding Officers.
But as the petitioners originally did not seek any impedance with Combat roles, stating it to be “policy matter”, their Command positions were restricted to Non-Combat Armed Services only. It was inevitable that one day the petitioning female officers will win — “change is inevitable”.
What is troubling is that, after losing the case on 12 March 2010, the Army and the Defense Ministry continued to argue the reprehensible.
The contentions set forward by the Union Government (as outlined in the next section) shows the profoundly established sex stereotyping in the minds of people despite laurels brought by women and why it needs to change.
What Needs To Change Permanent Commission
Throughout the hearings, the government has repeatedly contended with the most farcical of arguments, the most obtuse being the reference to physiological aspects in the absence of women commanding roles.
- The submissions claimed that women are prone to long term absence due to pregnancy and domestic obligations. Such contentions reek of sexism and are mounted on assumptions of socially assigned gender roles. The perception that women belong to the kitchen has been rejected in all professional fields, thus there is no reason that the army should stick to such bogus ideas.
- The government’s resistance to women in command positions was justified stating that ‘an all-male environment in a unit would require “moderated behaviour‟ in the presence of women officer[6]’ The male officers also claimed that the majority of soldiers are culturally hardwired not to be led by a woman commander. The irony here is that the Indian Army prides its discipline and obedience, however when it comes to obeying a woman officer who carries a higher rank than them, the snake of patriarchy and “male-ego” raises its ugly head.
- Another contention forwarded was that due to lack of “minimal facilities for habitat and hygiene” women officers should be restrained from deployment in conflict zones. However, it is worthy to note that 30% of total women officers are in fact deputed in conflict zones.
It is evident from the Centre’s submissions that all their claims stink of profound sexist ideologies based on preposterous and archaic notions of men being the “stronger sex”. In response to an inquiry in Lok Sabha on the shortage of officers, the then defence minister Subhash Bhamre clearly stated that there was an acute shortage of 11,500 officers in the Indian Army, out of which approximately 5,115 officers are deficient in the support services commissioned by women officers[7]. Despite this shortage, the Indian Army had let go of WOs due to gender discrimination and rather employed retired male colonel rank officers. Such actions of the Center have passed without any scrutiny for a long time, and have only aided propagate prejudicial and patriarchal mindset.
The doubts that few men in the army have regarding female officers can be resolved, but what cannot be discarded is a capable woman’s right to pursue a career of her choice. The men in the Defense represent Indian citizens and the above contentions illustrate precisely what’s wrong with the mindset of people of this nation.
Though a large part of the populace hailed this judgment, a major portion also condemned it stating that the judiciary has put National Security at risk. Yet again this brings us to the point unless the society changes its perspective towards women, mere changing of law would not have any outcome. The assertions presented by the Center’s submission just point about the need for reform to achieve equality. If the society continues to hold on to age-old fallacies and taboos, it is far-fetched that laws and amendments can do so.
Endnotes
- Ineligibility of females for enrollment or employment. No female shall be eligible for enrolment or employment in the regular Army, except in such corps, department, branch or other body forming part of, or attached to any portion of, the regular Army as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in his behalf.
- Article 16(1) of the Constitution
- Paridnya- The MIBM Research Journal, Vol-4 Issue-1, September 2016, Page 72-73
- WP (c) 1597 of 2003
- Civil Appeal Nos- 9367-9369 of 2011
- Civil Appeal Nos- 9367-9369 of 2011
- Press Information Bureau, Government of India, Ministry of Defence. Permanent Commission
Lavanya Rai & Jyoti Laxmi Rout | ICFAI Law School, IFHE Hyderabad.