How Many Women Promoted In Navy After Permanent Commission? Not Possible That None Was Competent : Supreme Court Asks Navy

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (December 13) asked Attorney General for India R Venkataramani about the status of promotion of Women Navy Officers who have been granted permanent commission pursuant to the 2020 decision in Union of India v. Lt Cdr Annie Nagaraja and others.

A bench comprising of the CJI, D.Y. Chandrachud and Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing miscellaneous applications filed in the Annie Nagaraja case by six Women Navy Officers seeking promotion-related reliefs

The CJI asked, “After our judgement, how many women have been promoted Mr AG? How many women have been promoted in the navy? It can't be that no single woman was competent.”  The AG replied that it may be just one promotion so far, while adding that he will revert after taking specific instructions.  

The AG stressed that the promotions involve a great deal of merit in consideration, he contended “It also has to be on merit. You can't turn a blind eye to merit.”. The court further remarked, “Mr AG, we find it a little difficult to believe that no single woman officer has been promoted. That's why we asked how many women were promoted.”

Representing the six officers, Senior Advocate V. Mohana addressed the issue of denial of promotions to women officers in the Indian Navy on the grounds of “systematic discrimination” wherein the applicants are being considered against their junior batches instead of their male counterparts. A similar matter was previously heard by the same bench on promotion policies for Women Army Officers on December 4, 2023.

Highlighting the Navy Policy to promote on the basis of “look year” of the officer concerned, Mohana explained “ In 2020, we got our PC. Take the example of one officer. The naval officers are saying that since she got PC in 2020, she could not be considered earlier. However, she was considered in 2018,19...in 2021 she was held as unfit. If she had been considered in her look year 2016, she would be top. The policy says that in my look year I should be considered. They didn't consider me in 2016 when there was a vacancy. Navy should have a special selection board. I am being considered with my junior officers.”

She added :

“As per the counter itself, the navy order has not been released. No IG has been given to any officer. This IG shows who were actually considered. They should have been considered in the look year with their batchmates…What was the purpose of granting us PC to consider us with our junior officers?”

The AG stated that there were approach papers for the concerned three look years and that he shall produce the same on the next hearing when the Court reopens.

Addressing the applicants, the CJI said that they ought to file an application before the Armed Forces Tribunal, instead of filing miscellaneous applications in a disposed of case.

“We must also be conscious that you filed a miscellaneous application...Ms Mohana, you have to follow your remedies by going to the appropriate forum. If we render a finding, you're shut out from full review at AFT”, CJI said, suggesting that the applicants approach the AFT.

Mohana replied that the Supreme Court would be in a better position to understand and apply its judgment and hence, the applicants approached it directly. However, when the CJI cautioned that if the Supreme Court dismisses the applications, the officers would be deprived of their remedy before the AFT, Mohana said that she would consult her clients and take instructions. The matter was adjourned and posted to January 2, 2024.

Case Details : Union of India v Lt Cdr Annie Nagaraja, Executive Officer Diary No. 23843-2023