Supreme Court Seeks Defence Ministry's Response On Woman Officer's Plea For Permanent Commission In Indian Coast Guard
The Supreme Court on February 12 issued notice on the plea of a woman Short Service Appointment (SSA) Officer, engaged with Indian Coast Guard (ICG), over denial of consideration for Permanent Commission despite 14 years of service. The Bench, comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, was hearing challenge to a Delhi High Court order dated December 21, 2023,...
The Supreme Court on February 12 issued notice on the plea of a woman Short Service Appointment (SSA) Officer, engaged with Indian Coast Guard (ICG), over denial of consideration for Permanent Commission despite 14 years of service.
The Bench, comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, was hearing challenge to a Delhi High Court order dated December 21, 2023, whereby the woman Officer's prayer for interim relief of continuation in service as Commandant (JG), ICG was rejected noting that final relief could not be granted by way of an interim order.
Senior Advocate Archana Pathak Dave, assisted by Advocate on Record Siddhant Sharma, appearing for the petitioner, cited the Supreme Court's judgments in Ministry of Defence v. Babita Puniya and Union of India v. Lt Cdr Annie Nagaraja which allowed Permanent Commission for women officers in Indian Army.
To summarize facts of the case, the woman Officer/petitioner was appointed as Assistant Commandant (General Duty-Women) in 2009. She was promoted to the post of Deputy Commandant (GD) in 2015 and to the post of Commandant (JG) in 2021. During 2021, she submitted a request for permanent absorption alongwith recommendations of her commanding officers.
However, a year later, the request was returned without action, on the basis that Ministry of Defence's (MoD) letter dated February 25, 2019 (regarding grant of permanent absorption to women officers) did not apply to ICG. Reportedly, the petitioner was also communicated that no provision for permanent absorption/commission of SSA Officers existed in ICG. Rather, procedure for induction of women officers in permanent cadre of GD branch existed and PMT/SSC option had to be exercised at the time of enrolment.
In May, 2023, the petitioner was communicated a release order pursuant to completion of her engagement period. Against the same, she approached the Delhi High Court.
The High Court denied interim relief to the petitioner, being of the view that if the petitioner was ultimately successful, she could be directed to be reinstated retrospectively. However, if she was not successful, any period spent in continuation of service, in terms of an interim order passed, would amount to illegal usurpation of office without any entitlement thereto.
Consequently, the petitioner was released from service in December, 2023. Challenging the High Court order, she approached the Supreme Court.
In her plea before the top Court, the petitioner states that she was part of the first ever All Women Crew on Dornier Aircraft deployed in the Eastern Region for undertaking Maritime Patrolling as Captain of Aircraft near the IMBL at ICGAS, Chennai. She has the highest flying hours as per seniority in all forces (including male and female) and has saved more than 300 lives at sea.
The petitioner was selected twice to participate in international exercise as detachment commander, and has appeared in as well as cleared the 'Mid-career professional examination' required for Commandant promotion. Regardless, a "fair consideration for Permanent Commission" has not been afforded to her.
Essentially, the petitioner is aggrieved by the absence of a policy for grant of permanent absorption to SSA women officers in ICG, even though the same has been formulated for other services under the MoD. She claims that in November 2023, she had asked for formulation of such a policy, however, the same has not been published so far.
She further assails the fact that she was released from service while her petition for grant of Permanent Commission was pending before the High Court, without considering the decisions in Babita Puniya and Annie Nagaraja, where the release of women officers from service was stayed under similar circumstances.
The course adopted in her respect, the petitioner says, is in contrast to that adopted in case of her male counterparts and other Women Short Service Commission (SSC) Officers of the Armed Forces who have been given Permanent Commission in the very branches where they were granted SSC.
The petitioner also avers that in 2015, ICG offered reemployment to retired SSC, Indian Navy officers, ignoring eligible SSA officers with training experience, and discriminated against the latter. She questions the existing policies as biased insofar as women SSA officers are not offered Permanent Commission even after 14 years of service, although Agnipath Jawans are offered permanent absorption after completing 4 years.
Counsels for petitioner: Senior Advocate Archana Pathak Dave; AOR Siddhant Sharma; Advocates Avnish Dave and Parmod Kumar Vishnoi
Case Title: Priyanka Tyagi v. Union of India & Ors., Special Leave to Appeal (C) 3045/2024