Petitioners, Arshnoor Kaur and another person, claimed that though they secured fourth and fifth positions, respectively, and are higher in merit than male candidates, they could not be selected due to the fewer vacancies earmarked for women.The court granted interim relief to petitioner 1, Kaur, and directed the Union and the Army to induct her in the next available training course for appointment as a JAG officer.The court questioned the Union for earmarking fewer posts for women, despite claiming the posts to be gender neutral. The court was unconvinced by the arguments submitted by the Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati that the JAG posts are gender neutral and that a 50:50 ratio is the selection ratio from 2023 onwards.“Gender neutrality does not mean 50:50 per cent. Gender neutrality means it does not matter which gender you come from,” the court observed.
Source link
