The Supreme Court on Wednesday, August 19, 2026 asked the Central government to consider granting permanent commission (PC) to Priya Tyagi, a woman officer who served in the Indian Coast Guard for about 14 years.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, made it clear that if the government does not grant her permanent commission under its existing policy, the Court may pass appropriate directions.
Background of the Case
Tyagi had served as a Short Service Appointment officer in the Coast Guard. Her counsel, Siddhant Sharma, told the Court that she had served from 2009 to 2024 and had been promoted from Assistant Commandant to Deputy Commandant.
Her superior officers had also recommended that she be considered for permanent absorption. The Centre, however, had earlier maintained that the Coast Guard's service conditions and infrastructure were different from those of the Army, Navy and Air Force.
In 2024, the Supreme Court had allowed Tyagi to continue serving as a General Duty officer while the dispute was being considered.
Court's Observation
During Wednesday's hearing, the Bench questioned why a woman officer who had served for years and received favourable recommendations should be denied consideration for permanent commission.
“If there is a system of permanent commission for male officers, what can be the reason to deny it to women?” the Court asked.
The Chief Justice also observed that differences between the Coast Guard and other armed forces could not by themselves justify completely excluding women from permanent commission.
“We cannot allow officers such as her to be humiliated like this,” the Bench said.
The Centre's top law officer, Attorney General R. Venkataramani, submitted that the Coast Guard's operational requirements and infrastructure had evolved over time. He said a new policy now provided a framework under which Tyagi's eligibility could be examined.
Decision
The Supreme Court directed the government to consider Tyagi's case under the new policy. The Bench noted that she was now being treated as an eligible Short Service Appointment officer and was at the top of the relevant category.
The Court further made it clear that if the government does not consider her case appropriately, it would pass an order.
