The Delhi High Court, on 25 August 2025, presided by Justice C. Hari Shankar & Justice Om Prakash Shukla, allowed the WP filed by the Petitioner, directing her appointment against one of the unfilled Air Force (i) Flying vacancies under the NDA Examination Notice 10/2023-NDA-II, holding that the denial of appointment despite available vacancies was contrary to the principle of gender neutrality.
The Petitioner, despite passing the NDA examination and being medically fit was denied appointment despite there being 20 vacancies being open in the Air Force (i) Flying Category. She contended that apart from the two posts specifically reserved for women, the balance vacancies were open to all candidates and could not be treated as exclusively for men. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court ruling in Arshnoor Kaur v. UOI 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1668 [1], which stressed gender neutrality in defence recruitment.The Respondents argued that only two posts were reserved for women and permitting further appointments through NDA would disturb the intake balance under other recruitment channels like AFCAT (Air Force Common Admission Test) and CDSE(Combined Defence Services Examination). They maintained that the Petitioner had participated with knowledge of the two reserved female vacancies and could not challenge the vacancy distribution after registering for the same.
The Court rejected the respondents’ stance, holding that the 90 vacancies were open to both men and women. It emphasized the constitutional mandate of gender equality under Articles 14 to 16 and found an exception in Article 33, which empowers Parliament to modify the fundamental rights in their application to members of the Armed Forces. The Court also took notice of the fact that there were eligible female candidates who had cleared the examination and so, the Respondents were not justified in keeping 20 vacancies unfilled.The Court directed that the Petitioner be appointed forthwith against one of the unfilled posts and granted her parity in seniority and service benefits with other selected candidates. The writ petition was accordingly allowed, with no order as to costs.
Appearances:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sahil Mongia, Mr. Yash Yadav and Ms. Sanjana Samor, Advs.
For the Respondents: Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with Mr. Rohan Jaitley, CGSC with Mr. Dev Pratap Shahi, Mr. Varun Pratap Singh, Mr. Yogya Bhatia, Mr. Amit Gupta, Mr. Naman and Mr. Shubham Sharma, Advs. Mr. Ravinder Agarwal, Mr. Manish Kumar Singh and Mr. Vasu Agarwal, Advs.for R-2.
[1] The Court here, emphasized that true gender neutrality requires candidates to be selected purely on merit, not constrained by administrative gender ratios.
