Unfortunate That Coast Guard Doesn't Give Permanent Commission To Women Unlike Army, Navy & Air Force: Supreme Court

It was unfortunate that the Indian Coast Guard was opposing the grant of Permanent Commission for women officers despite the Army, Air Force and Navy inducting women on a permanent basis following Court directions, observed the Supreme Court.

Expressing the intent to decide the issue, the Supreme Court transferred to itself the petition pending in the Delhi High Court.

The bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud directed so in light of the recent judgments of the Top Court in granting PC to women officers placed similarly in other branches of the defence services, Indian Army, Air Force, and Navy. The order came when the Court was hearing an appeal filed by Officer Priyanka Tyagi who was denied interim relief of continuation of service as Deputy Commandant by the High Court in the pending writ.   

The Court observed in its order :

As regards the Indian Army, Indian Air Force and Indian Navy, this Court has rendered judgments resulting in the induction of women in the Armed Forces on a permanent basis. Unfortunately, the Indian Coast Guard continues to be an outlier. Particularly having regard to the broader constitutional mandate contained in Article 15 of the Constitution, the petition should be heard by this Court.

Both Senior Advocate Archana Pathak Dave, representing the petitioner, and the Attorney General for India, Mr R Venkataramani agreed to the transfer to the Supreme Court.

As an interim relief for the Petitioner who is a SSC (Short Service Commission) Officer, the Court has directed that her service on the same post she had prior to her retirement in December 2023 should continue uninterrupted in the ICG until further orders are passed. The order further directs the Union to assign to her a suitable posting relevant to her cadre and qualifications, along with entitlement to arrears of salary and increments. 

"...We accordingly direct that the services of the petitioner shall be continued uninterruptedly in the Indian Coast Guard in the post which she occupied on the date of her discharge on 30 December 2023 till further orders. She shall be assigned a suitable posting commensurate with her cadre and qualifications. She shall be entitled to the arrears of salary and increments as they fall due."

The court has called for a counter affidavit to be filed by the Union within four weeks and has scheduled the matter, along with the transferred case, to be listed on July 19, 2024.

It may recalled that in its affidavit, the ICG had informed the Supreme Court that various infrastructural changes were to be made to send female officers on sea-borne missions. 

The affidavit affirmed by the Principal Director, Coast Guard Head Quarters, stated that ICG, primarily a sea-going service, allocates 66% of its billets for manning afloat units, leaving only 33% for shore support units. Limited shore billets result in prolonged sea tenures for officers.  

“Hence, only 10% of shore billets/appointments were considered for the women officers for the permanent entry, as at that time it was considered that the ships were not designed to factor separate accommodation / facilities for women entry.” 

To address these challenges, the ICG emphasizes the need for operational measures and a phased approach. The operational measures would involve enlarging the infrastructure to accommodate more women officers, especially on ships designed with accommodations for women. The phased approach aims to systematically implement changes to make the working conditions conducive for women officers on board ships. 

Earlier, while hearing the petition, the bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud had questioned the ICG for not granting permanent commission for women, although othe defence forces- Army, Navy and the Air Force- have started giving such relief to women following the judgements of the Supreme Court. 

CJI also told the Attorney General that the argument of functional differences cannot be used in the present age to deny equal treatment to women.

A detailed report on the contentions raised by the ICG can be found here. 

Background 

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. In 2021, she submitted a request for permanent absorption along with recommendations from her commanding officers. 

However, a year later, the request was returned without action, on the basis that the Ministry of Defence's (MoD) letter dated February 25, 2019 (regarding the grant of permanent absorption to women officers) did not apply to ICG. Reportedly, the petitioner also communicated that no provision for permanent absorption/commission of SSA Officers existed in ICG. Rather, the procedure for induction of women officers in the permanent cadre of the GD branch existed and the PMT/SSC option had to be exercised at the time of enrolment. 

In May 2023, the petitioner communicated a release order pursuant to the 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. 

Senior Advocate Archana Pathak Dave and Siddhant Sharma Advocate-on-Record represented the petitioner.

Case Title: Priyanka Tyagi v. Union of India & Ors., Special Leave to Appeal (C) 3045/2024

Click here to read the order