Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute Properties Acquired By Gift During Marriage Remain Separate Property Of Spouse Under French Civil Code; Husband Entitled To Half Share Only In Community Assets: Madras High Court Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Closure Of Human Trafficking Complaint, Flags Lack Of Bona Fides Access To Justice Cannot Be Denied When Tribunal Is Not Functioning': Calcutta High Court Holds Writ Maintainable Under Article 226 Amid Stalled Conciliation Proceedings Violation Of Natural Justice Overrides Bar On Maintainability Under Section 18 MSMED Act: Orissa High Court Panic In A Train Does Not Mean Self-Destruction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants ₹8 Lakh Compensation For Passenger's Death In Stampede Section 101 JJ Act | Date Of Knowledge Of Order, Not Mere Knowledge Of Disposal, Commences Limitation Period: Delhi High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Order Declaring Inam Land As Govt Property Without Determining Occupancy Rights Proviso To Section 125(3) CrPC Does Not Limit Enforcement Of Monetary Relief Orders Under Section 20 DV Act: Telangana High Court Regularization Of Deviation Within Permissible Plot Envelope Governed By Uniform Fee Schedule, Arbitrary 5X Penalty Unsustainable: J&K&L High Court Man Who Blackmailed Woman With Her Own Nude Photos To Rape Her Repeatedly Can't Escape Conviction Merely Because His Voice Sample Wasn't Taken: Delhi High Court Arbitration Clause In Sale Agreement Cannot Be Invoked If Subject Matter Involves Third-Party Title Disputes: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Errs In Dismissing Amendment Plea If New Facts Emerge From Written Statement: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Compensation For Own Wrong': Gujarat High Court Rules Tortfeasors & Legal Heirs Cannot Claim Motor Accident Damages Under Section 166 MV Act Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Police And Magistrates Over Illegal Remand Of Juvenile Accused Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) Hindu Marriage Act | Spouse Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Cruelty And Desertion Must Prove Allegations With Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Cannot Let Land Become Banjar: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Appointment Of Receiver Under BNSS Amidst Pending Civil Title Disputes Section 8 Arbitration Act | Executing Court Must Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Falls Within Scope Of Compromise Decree: Madhya Pradesh High Court Suit For Damages Arising Out Of Tortious Injury Barred By Limitation If Not Filed Within One Year: Punjab & Haryana High Court 72-Hour Gap Not Proximate: Calcutta High Court Quashes Murder Conviction, Holds 'Last Seen' Theory Inapplicable When Time Gap Is Wide Original Owner Cannot Create Trust Over Property Already Sold; Separate Relief For Title Declaration Not Required: Madras High Court

Arbitrary No More: Supreme Court Orders Overhaul of Army's Promotion Criteria for Women Officers

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision dated November 3, 2023, the Supreme Court of India, headed by Chief Justice Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, has directed a reassessment for the promotion of women officers in the Indian Army to the rank of Colonel. The apex court, while addressing the grievances of women officers regarding their non-empanelment for promotion, observed, “The nub of the dispute in the present case relates to the manner in which the CRs of the women officers were assessed... the manner in which the cut off has been applied for reckoning CRs of the women officers for empanelment as Colonels is arbitrary.”

The bench, which also included Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra, found that the process used to evaluate the Confidential Reports (CRs) for the promotion of women officers post their Permanent Commission (PC) was not in line with the established policy framework or the earlier judgment of this Court in the case of Lieutenant Colonel Nitisha vs Union of India.

The Supreme Court’s decision rectifies the arbitrariness in the cutoff dates for CRs, which were deemed contrary to the principles laid down in Nitisha’s case and the policy directives of the Army itself. “Such an approach does disservice to the need to provide justice to the women officers who have fought a long and hard battle before this Court,” the bench remarked.

The Court has ordered the convening of a Special No 3 Selection Board within a fortnight from the date of the order, ensuring that all women officers, except those already empaneled, will be reconsidered for promotion.

Date of Decision: November 3, 2023

Nitisha and Others VS Union of India and Others     

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/06-Nov-2023-Nitisha-Vs-UOI.pdf"]

Latest Legal News