Terminating Women Officer For Marriage Is Arbitrary: SC

It is definitely most heartening to note that while boldly rising to the occasion as anticipated and displaying laudably the most highest standards of promotion of equality between a men and women as ideally should be always, the Supreme Court in a most learned, logical, laudable, landmark and latest judgment titled Union of India and Others vs Ex. Lt. Selina John in Civil Appeal No. 1990 of 2019 that was pronounced as recently as on February 14, 2024 in the exercise of its civil appellate jurisdiction has certainly most commendably, most courageously and so also ostensibly most cogently termed the discharge of a permanent commissioned officer in Military Nursing Service on ground of her entering into marriage as "manifestly arbitrary and coarse case of gender discrimination and inequality". It is incontrovertible that discrimination of any kind whether it is based on region, religion, state or gender or any other reason cannot be justified at all under any circumstances! Of course, there can be no denying that we must pay rapt attention here to what a Bench of Apex Court comprising of Hon'ble Mr Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Hon'ble Mr Justice Dipankar Datta very candidly acknowledged that accepting such patriarchal rule undermined human dignity, right to non-discrimination and fair treatment, while ordering the Union government to pay Rs 60 lakh to Ex Lt Selina John within eight weeks as a full and final settlement.

It also must be noticed that Ex Lt Selina John who is a former military nurse was removed from service under a now-defunct Army order that provided marriage as a ground for such action. It cannot be overlooked that this superb and most extremely laudable directive came while hearing a case in which Ex Lt Selina John was removed from service in August 1988. It must be also mentioned here which merits noting that the release order said that her job was terminated on the grounds that she got married and that she had obtained a low grade in the annual confidential report.

It is undoubtedly worth paying attention that the Union Government had challenged amazingly the decision of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Lucknow to reinstate her with all consequential benefits. It must be pointed out here that the Apex Court did not accept the submission that the respondent who was a Permanent Commissioned Officer in the Military Nursing Service could have been released or discharged on the ground that she had got married. It also must be noted that the Apex Court was told that the Army Instruction No. 61 of 1977 titled as "Terms and conditions of service for the grant of permanent commissions in the Military Nursing Service" has been withdrawn by a subsequent letter on August 29, 1995.

At the very outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by a Bench of Apex Court comprising of Hon'ble Mr Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Hon'ble Mr Justice Dipankar Datta sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in the opening para that, "The conclusion drawn in the impugned judgment that the respondent – Ex. Lt. Selina John's release from the Military Nursing Service was wrong and illegal, does not require any interference, in spite of the arguments raised, questioning the reasoning given by the Armed Force Tribunal, Regional Bench, Lucknow."

Most significantly, most courageously, most remarkably and so also one must say most brilliantly, the Apex Court Bench then goes on to sagaciously postulate what really constitutes the cornerstone of this landmark judgment mandating that, "We are unable to accept any submission that the respondent – Ex. Lt. Selina John, who was a Permanent Commissioned Officer in the Military Nursing Service, could have been released/discharged on the ground that she had got married. This rule, it is accepted, was applicable to only women nursing officers. 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. Acceptance of such patriarchal rule undermines human dignity, right to non-discrimination and fair treatment. Laws and regulations based on gender-based bias are constitutionally impermissible. (Anuj Garg and Others v. Hotel Association of India and Others (2008) 3 SCC).. Rules making marriage of women employees and their domestic involvement a ground for disentitlement would be unconstitutional."

As it turned out, the Apex Court Bench then further propounds in the next para of this cogent judgment that, "We may also observe that Army Instruction No. 61 of 1977 titled "Terms and conditions of service for the grant of permanent commissions in the Military Nursing Service", as informed, has been withdrawn by a subsequent letter dated 29.08.1995."

Be it noted, the Apex Court Bench then notes in the next para of this refreshing judgment disclosing that, "During the course of hearing, it was fairly pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent – Ex. Lt. Selina John did work as a nurse for short time in a private organisation."

Most rationally, what gives me maximum happiness to note is that the Apex Court Bench then directs in the next para of this robust judgment that, "Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, we direct the appellant(s) to pay compensation of Rs.60,00,000/- (rupees sixty lakh only) to the respondent – Ex. Lt. Selina John within a period of eight weeks from the date a copy of this order is served/made available to them."

What's more, the Apex Court Bench then further stipulates in the next para of this most commendable judgment stating that, "In case the payment is not made within a period of eight weeks, the appellant(s) will pay interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of this order till the payment is made."

Furthermore, the Apex Court Bench then further directs in the next para of this remarkable judgment that, "The aforesaid compensation of Rs.60,00,000/- (rupees sixty lakhs) will be in full and final settlement of all the claims of the respondent – Ex. Lt. Selina John against the appellant(s)."

For the sake of clarity, it must be certainly added here that the Apex Court Bench then further clarifies in the next para of this brilliant judgment that, "The impugned judgment directing the reinstatement of the respondent – Ex. Lt. Selina John with back-wages etc. will be treated as modified in terms of the above direction."

Still more, the Apex Court Bench then hastens to add in the next para of this notable judgment holding that, "Recording the aforesaid, the appeal is disposed of in the above terms."

Finally, the Apex Court Bench then concludes by holding in the final para of this progressive judgment that, "Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of."

All said and done, what stands out most distinguishably in this noteworthy judgment is that the Apex Court has made it indubitably clear that there will be zero tolerance for gender based discrimination and for this no words can ever be adequate to hail it and it must be candidly conceded by me that it is beyond the capacity of my pen to express in words that how much happiness it gives to my mind, thoughts and heart when I read such elegant, eloquent, effective and most significantly worth emulating judgments by all the courts not just in India but all over the world! It definitely merits no reiteration of any kind that there can be no gender based discrimination ever possible anywhere in any corner of this earth if such gender equality judgments keep coming in all such similar cases that comes up before any Court for deciding it! No denying or disputing it!