A division bench of the Supreme Court, comprising of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Aravind Kumar refused the plea of an aspirant to reserve fifty percent of seats in the National Defence Academy (NDA) for women. The bench while noting that although the candidate had not secured the qualifying marks in her category, but in “overall merit” would have obtained more marks than some of the male candidates admitted to military academy held that;
“The larger issue is being examined by us already. The opening for women candidates has to occur over a period of time. It is not possible to immediately have fifty percent of the seats for women and this issue is already being examined by us. Thus, though we have sympathy for the petitioner, in the present scenario is not possible for us to give any relief.”
More than 66 years after the birth of NDA, women were finally allowed admission into the academy as a result of an interim order passed by the Apex Court. In August 2021, Justice Kaul after rejecting the centre’s arguments that restriction against women was a matter of policy, permitted women to take the NDA recruitment examination. In the month of September 2021, the bench affirmed its earlier ruling by rejecting the plea of defence ministry to postpone the induction of women into the academy. The bench stated that “It would be difficult for us to accept such a position, the aspiration of the women candidates having arisen in view of orders we have passed, albeit, subject to the final orders. The Armed Services of India have dealt with very difficult situations on the border and in the country and acquitted themselved admirably. To deal with the emergencies is a part of their training. We are sure that training woulf come in gandy to deal with this ’emergency’, if it is so perceived for the larger gender neutral issues which cannot be postponed.”
In November 2021, despite an overwhelming response from female candidates, only 19 were admitted in the NDA, to which the centre justified saying there was a lack of adequate infrastructure in the Pune based institution. The same situation occured again in NDA-1 examination of 2022. The bench observed that “Nineteen seats cannot be for all times to come. It was only an ad hoc measure.”
The Additional Solicitor General of India, Aishwarya Bhati justified to the Court that “the aspect of intake is not just connected to infrastructure in the academy but also the requirement of forces.”
The larger question, as stated in the beginning is pending before the court in the matter of Kush Kalra v. Union of India & Ors. [W.P. (Civil) No. 1416 of 2020].
Each course at the NDA has 370 vacancies for the three services out of which 208 cadets get commissioned to the Indian Army, 120 to the Indian Air Force and 42 to the Indian Navy.
Since the intake of females is limited to only 19, the petitoner was not selected, even though she allegedly received more marks than some of her male counterparts.
The bench while declining the petition categorically agreed to list the petition with the matter already lisyed before it. The Court pronounced that, “It is submitted that the listing of this petition with the aforementioned matter would only give an opportunity to the petitioner to assist the court. Lost along with it.”
Case Title: Nidhi Chaudhary v. Union of India & Anr. [W.P. (Civil) No. 33 of 2023]
0 Comments