The Supreme Court delivered a decisive judgement in the writ petition challenging the gender-based reservation of vacancies for Judge Advocate General (JAG) posts in the Indian Army. The petition, filed by two women law graduates, questioned the legality of the 2023 JAG Entry Scheme notification which reserved six vacancies for men and only three for women, even though several women candidates had achieved higher merit rankings than their male counterparts.
The Bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Justice Manmohan had reserved the judgment on 8 May 2025 after strong oral observations. The Court held that it was prima facie satisfied with the case made by the petitioners. It clearly rejected the government’s stance presented by the Additional Solicitor General that a 50:50 selection ratio introduced in 2023 rendered the JAG recruitment gender neutral.
The Court held that by virtue of the notification issued under Section 12 of the Army Act, 1950, women are permitted to join the JAG branch, and therefore the executive cannot restrict their numbers or make reservations for male officers under the guise of an induction policy or administrative instructions. The Bench found that the impugned notification, to the extent it provided only three vacancies for female candidates against six for male candidates, was contrary to the concept of equality under the Constitution, amounting to an impermissible reservation for men.
It was further observed that male and female officers in the JAG branch do not belong to distinct cadres nor do they have different conditions of service. The true meaning of gender neutrality, as envisaged in the 2023 Notification, is that the Union of India must recruit the most meritorious candidates irrespective of gender, especially since the primary role of the branch is to provide legal advice and not combat duties.
Significantly, to compensate women for years of non-enrolment due to earlier discriminatory practices, the Court directed that the Union must allocate not less than 50% of the vacancies to women candidates. However, it categorically held that even this allocation cannot be applied as a cap, restricting women to exactly 50% despite their higher merit would itself violate the right to equality.
Rejecting the government’s justification, the Bench made clear that the executive cannot reserve posts for men in a supposedly gender-neutral branch. Justice Manmohan stressed that true gender neutrality requires a combined merit list without arbitrary gender-based ceilings. Drawing a parallel to the Air Force’s induction of women fighter pilots, the Court questioned the logic behind restricting women from achieving their rightful place in the Army’s legal wing.
Consequently, Petitioner 1, who ranked fourth overall, was ordered to be commissioned at the next intake into the JAG department. The second petitioner, having joined the Indian Navy during the proceedings, was deemed ineligible for relief under the present petition.
The Court further directed the Army to abolish gender-based vacancy restrictions and conduct JAG recruitment through an integrated merit list, ensuring equal opportunity for men and women.
Appearances:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Gopal Sankarnarayanan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mandeep Kalra, AOR Ms. Anushna Satapathy, Adv. Ms. Radhika Jalan, Adv. Ms. Widaphi Lyngdoh, Adv. Mr. Yashas J, Adv. Ms. Shweta Singh, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Yadav, Adv. Mr. Paras Mohan Sharma, Adv. Ms. Shefali Tripathi, Adv. Ms. Radhika Narula, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Lekhi, Adv. Mr. Vishal Sinha, Adv. Ms. Ishita Chowdhury, Adv.
For the Respondents: Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Ms. Shagun Thakur, Adv. Mr. Kartikay Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Chitvan Singhal, Adv, Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Sonali Jain, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Purnendu Bajpai, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh
Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Dr. Dinesh Rattan Bhardwaj, AOR Mr. Irshad Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Mahesh Singh, Adv. Dr. Ashutosh Garg, Adv. Mr. Samarth Mohanty, Adv. Mr. Abhisth Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Vernika Tomar, AOR