No Evidence Prevails Unless ‘Conclusive, Convincing, and Beyond Reasonable Doubt’: Calcutta High Court Modifies Assault Convictions” "Fraudulent Intentions Clear as Day": Rajasthan High Court Denies Bail in ₹40 Crore Commodity Trading Scam Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Bail to Former Minister in Money Laundering Case Mere Apology Insufficient to Negate Criminal Liability for Cyber Harassment: Madras High Court Mere Criminal Antecedents Not Sufficient to Deny Bail; Long Incarceration and Completion of Investigation Warrant Bail: Kerala High Court Justice Cannot Be Denied When Plaintiff Proves Right, Title, and Interest in Property, Says Calcutta High Court Permanent Injunction Granted Against Government for Failure to Follow Mandatory Rule 3 Notice: Andhra Pradesh High Court Circumstantial Evidence Must Form an Unbroken Chain: P&H High Court Validates Conviction under Sections 302/34 IPC "Right to Be Forgotten Must Prevail Over Freedom of Expression in Acquittal Cases," Rules Delhi High Court Unjust Enrichment Cannot Be the Characteristic of a Government: Kerala High Court Orders 12% Interest on Delayed Payments Vague and Omnibus Statements Cannot Sustain Criminal Prosecution: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Alleging Cruelty and Forced Miscarriage State Law Governs Court Fees Refunds in Mediation Settlements, But Refund Allowed as Discretionary Relief: Supreme Court Death Was Homicidal, Not Suicidal: Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Wife's Murder Case Land Compensation | Market Value Determined by the Reference Court Is Lawful and Reasonable: Andhra Pradesh High Court Cal High Court Quashes Wilful Defaulter Declarations, Cites Procedural Violations and Unreliable Evidence Taxation Law | When tax liability arises solely due to retrospective amendments, waiver of interest is warranted: Punjab and Haryana High Court Civil Authorities Not Required to Be Impleaded in Bail Applications: Supreme Court Clarifies Bail Procedures for Foreign Nationals Compensation Must Address Long-Term Needs and Recovery: Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Accident Victim to ₹48 Lakhs Criminal Law Cannot Be Misused for Civil Matters: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against MLA in Goa Property Dispute Minor Contradictions in Testimonies Not Sufficient to Overturn Convictions: Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Kerala Political Clash Murder Case

Terminating Employment Because the Woman Has Got Married Is a Coarse Case of Gender Discrimination: Gender Discrimination in Military Nursing Service Struck Down by Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India, comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, ruled against the wrongful termination of Ex. Lt. Selina John from the Military Nursing Service on the grounds of her marriage, marking a significant step against gender discrimination in the armed forces.

Brief on Legal Point: The crux of the judgment revolved around the issue of gender discrimination, particularly the invalidity of terminating a woman’s employment solely based on her marital status. The apex court held this practice as manifestly arbitrary and a glaring instance of gender discrimination.

Facts and Issues: The case pertained to Ex. Lt. Selina John, who was released from the Military Nursing Service following her marriage. This practice was based on a rule applicable only to women nursing officers, which the Supreme Court scrutinized for its constitutional validity.

Gender Discrimination: The Court unequivocally stated, “Such rule was ex-facie manifestly arbitrary, as terminating employment because the woman has got married is a coarse case of gender discrimination and inequality.” This observation underscored the Court’s stance against gender-based biases in employment.

Constitutional Law: The judgment reinforced that “Laws and regulations based on gender-based bias are constitutionally impermissible,” emphasizing the right to non-discrimination and fair treatment under the Indian Constitution.

 

 

Withdrawal of Army Instruction: The Court took note of the withdrawal of Army Instruction No. 61 of 1977, which had governed the terms of service for permanent commissions in the Military Nursing Service. This withdrawal was seen as a progressive step towards eliminating gender-based employment policies.

Award of Compensation: Recognizing the injustice meted out to Ex. Lt. Selina John, the Court directed the appellants to pay her a compensation of Rs. 60,00,000, with an interest penalty for delayed payment, marking it as a full and final settlement of all claims.

Decision: The Supreme Court concluded that the termination of Ex. Lt. Selina John from the Military Nursing Service on the ground of her marriage was illegal and directed the payment of compensation, modifying the impugned judgment accordingly.

Date of Decision: February 14, 2024

Union of India & Others vs. Ex. Lt. Selina John

Similar News