Forces Not Bastion Of Only Males: Karnataka High Court Suggests Gender Neutral Nomenclature For Term 'Ex-Servicemen'
The Karnataka High Court has called for changes in the nomenclature employed to refer to retired army, navy and air force personnel; suggesting the Union and the State Government to use the term ‘ex-service personnel’ in place of the term ‘ex-servicemen’ in its policy making endeavours. A single bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna of the High Court said that: “There...
The Karnataka High Court has called for changes in the nomenclature employed to refer to retired army, navy and air force personnel; suggesting the Union and the State Government to use the term ‘ex-service personnel’ in place of the term ‘ex-servicemen’ in its policy making endeavours.
A single bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna of the High Court said that:
“There is an imperative need of change of nomenclature from ‘ex-servicemen’ to ‘ex-service personnel’ which would be in tune with the ever evolving, dynamic tenets of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.”
The Court said that the word ‘men’ in the title ‘ex-servicemen’ portrayed discrimination as it sought to demonstrate that the forces were still a bastion of the male, which was clearly not the case.
Adding that there was a time when women had no combatant role in any force, the Court pointed out that there had occurred paradigm shifts from the past, with women reaching combatant services in various supervisory roles as officers and on other responsibilities in the Indian Army, the Indian Air Force and in the Indian Navy.
Justice Nagaprasanna further stressed that the word ‘men’ demonstrated a misogynous posture which was a relic of the age old masculine culture.
Noting that it was ultimately in the domain of the rule making authority to consider a change in the nomenclature, Justice Nagaprasanna stated that:
“Equality should not remain a mere idle incantation, but must be a vibrant living reality. It must be remembered that extension of women’s right is the basic principle of all social progress. Only with a change in the mindset of the rule making authorities and policy makers, can there be recognition of commitment of the values of the Constitution.”
The observations of the Court came while dealing with a writ petition challenging government guidelines which stated that daughters of ‘ex-service men’ ceased to be dependents and could not be issued I-Cards as ‘dependents of ex-service men’ upon their marriage, while sons of such personnel could continue being dependents regardless of their marital status.
While the Court struck down the clause which excluded married daughters from the definitional scope of ‘dependents,’ while parting it went ahead and noted that the term ‘ex-servicemen’ was itself discriminatory, calling upon the legislature to consider making it gender-neutral.
Case Title: Priyanka R. Patil v. Kendriya Sainik Board and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 1
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 19722 of 2021
Coram: Justice M. Nagaprasanna