Supreme Court Asks 6 Women Navy Officers Granted Permanent Commission To Approach Armed Forces Tribunal For Promotion-Related Reliefs

While disposing of Indian women navy officers' plea seeking promotion-related reliefs consequent to the grant of permanent commission to them, the Supreme Court today said that the Armed Forces Tribunal would be the appropriate forum to address the mixed questions of fact and law involved. It granted liberty to the officers to move the Tribunal which, considering that the officers' have been agitating the issues for about 2 decades, shall preferably decide their applications within 4 months of filing.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan passed the order in miscellaneous applications filed by 6 Indian Navy women officers in the Union of India v. Lt Cdr Annie Nagaraja case, seeking promotion-related reliefs.

The order was dictated thus:

"[The applicants] submitted representations seeking consequential benefits (including promotion) in terms of direction No.8 issued by this Court...the competent authority on consideration of such representation and claim for promotion passed the orders like dated 06.01.2023, in terms whereof the promotional claim has been turned down after observing that no anomaly was found in her appraisals and that the officer was accorded a fair and just consideration in all respects by the Promotional Board. The order further recites that the Redressal and Complaint Advisory Board having capably and independently examined the representation, is of opinion that the statutory complaint is devoid of merit...It seems to us that the order dated 06.01.2023 categorically states that the claim of the applicants for promotion has been duly considered or that no anomaly was found in the appraisal of the record, essentially giving rise to a fresh cause of action for which there is an efficacious alternative remedy to approach the Armed Forces Tribunal."

The Court opined that questions like (a) the benchmark of promotion (b) cut-off date for such benchmark (c) mode of evaluation of service record (d) evaluation of overall suitability (e) inter-se placement in seniority, and (f) disparity, if any, between male and female officers would require in-depth consideration by AFT. As these are mixed questions of facts and law, the appropriate remedy for effective determination would be for the applicants to approach the AFT.

While giving liberty to the applicants to approach the Tribunal, the Court added that if the requisite application is filed within 4 weeks, no question qua expiry of limitation shall be entertained and a decision shall be rendered on merits.

"Having regard to the fact that the applicants are asserting their claims, especially towards parity with their male counterparts, for last more than 2 decades, we request the Tribunal to accord out of turn hearing, and make an endeavor to decide the applications as early as possible, and preferably within 4 months, from the date of filing of the original application", the order further stated.

It is worthwhile to mention that last year as well, a former CJI DY Chandrachud-led bench expressed that the women officers ought to file an application before the Armed Forces Tribunal, instead of a miscellaneous applications in a disposed of case.

During today's hearing, counsel for the applicant-women officers sought to place reliance on the Court's decisions in Ministry of Defence v. Babita Puniya and Annie Nagaraja which allowed Permanent Commission for women officers in the Indian Army and Navy respectively. He argued that women officers in the present case had been considered alongwith male officers, even though they were not on the same footing (as the women officers were granted PC later).

Attorney General R Venkataramani (for Union), on the other hand, submitted that it is open for the applicants to challenge the orders turning down their promotion claim before the AFT.

Upon hearing the parties, the bench expressed that the issues involved could not be raised in a miscellaneous application and suggested that the applicants approach the AFT for an effective determination of the same.

Case Title: UNION OF INDIA Versus LT. CDR. ANNIE NAGARAJA, EXECUTIVE OFFICER, Diary No. 23843-2023