SUPREME COURT SLAMS NAVY FOR DENYING COMMISSION TO WOMAN JAG OFFICER:

The Supreme Court recently expressed strong disapproval over the Indian Navy’s persistent failure to grant Permanent Commission (PC) to a woman Short Service Commission (SSC) officer from the 2007 batch in the Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch, despite prior judicial observations favoring such a decision. Emphasizing that its previous directive to "consider" the officer’s eligibility for PC should not be construed as optional, the Court firmly reminded the Naval authorities that such language does not allow them to disregard the Court’s intent.

The case concerns Lieutenant Commander Seema Chaudhary, a woman officer who has been engaged in protracted litigation—spanning five rounds—yet remains denied a Permanent Commission by the Indian Navy. A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh heard the matter and, upon a request by Senior Advocate Dr. R. Balasubramanian (appearing for the respondents), listed it for the first week of July to allow the authorities time to seek further instructions.

During the proceedings, Senior Advocate Rekha Palli, representing the petitioner, drew attention to a key disparity: while male officers are directly inducted into the Navy on a permanent basis, women are only recruited through Short Service Commission. She further underscored that the Navy has very few women in the JAG branch, and as of now, not a single woman has been granted Permanent Commission.

Upon examining the petitioner’s service records and the Board proceedings related to PC, the bench questioned the rationale behind the Navy’s denial of PC, especially since the officer had been found fit in all relevant aspects. In response, Dr. Balasubramanian argued that three of the officer’s Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) contained adverse remarks that could not be overlooked. However, Justice Surya Kant countered by pointing out that the adverse entries in those ACRs—spanning from 2016-17 to 2018-19—had already been overruled by the reviewing authority.

Making a sharp observation on the institutional attitude, Justice Kant remarked that the concerned authority needs to "shed its ego", adding, "Enough is enough...We will give you one week to take her in for the permanent commission." He further cast doubt on the intent of the male officers who had authored the adverse ACRs, noting that despite her commendable performance, a male officer had undermined her efforts, arbitrarily concluding that she was unfit for Permanent Commission.

Referring to an earlier directive by a bench led by former Chief Justice of India Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud in 2024, which instructed the Navy to reconsider the petitioner’s eligibility for PC, Justice Kant firmly reminded the respondent counsel: “The 2024 judgement has attained finality and clear cut directions were issued to the Naval authorities. It cannot be at the whims and fancies of the officers. Ask them not to make this an ego issue and grant her permanent commission."