The Supreme Court has strongly criticized the Indian Navy for not granting Permanent Commission (PC) to Seema Chaudhary, a woman Short Service Commission (SSC) officer from the 2007 batch in the Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch. Despite multiple court proceedings and a 2024 Supreme Court directive, she continues to be denied the commission.
Calling out the Navy’s conduct, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh said:
"Enough is enough...We will give you one week to take her in for the permanent commission."
Read also: Arrest of Prof. Ali Khan Mahmudabad: A Case of Misuse of Power and Constitutional Concerns
The judges made it clear that the Court’s earlier direction to “consider” the petitioner’s case should not be misunderstood as optional.
Background of the Case
Seema Chaudhary was commissioned into the Navy on 6 August 2007 as an SSC officer in the JAG branch. She was promoted to Lieutenant in 2009 and then to Lieutenant Commander in 2012. She received two service extensions in 2016 and 2018. However, in August 2020, she was informed that her service would end in 2021.
In 2020, the Supreme Court’s ruling in Union of India v. Lt Cdr Annie Nagaraja held that all SSC officers in the education, law, and logistics branches should be considered for PC. Seema, who was part of that case, was still denied PC under a 2008 policy letter that was later struck down.
Read also: CJI BR Gavai Urges Bar Associations to Support Young Lawyers with CSR-Funded Group Insurance
Even after the 2020 ruling, Seema’s application for PC was rejected. She then filed a review petition, leading to the 2024 Supreme Court order that:
“The case of the petitioner for the grant of PC be considered afresh by reconvening a Selection Board… She was the only serving JAG Branch officer of the 2007 batch whose case for PC was to be considered.”
The Court further directed:
“If a proportional increase in the vacancies is required… this shall be carried out without creating any precedent for the future. We have issued this direction under Article 142 of the Constitution.”
Read also: SC Directs Centre To Notify New Rules For Consumer Forum Appointments; Ensures 5-Year Tenur
Despite these orders, Seema had to return to the Court yet again, alleging contempt. She claimed her denial of PC was linked to a workplace harassment complaint she made against a male officer. A Board of Inquiry found merit in her complaint, but instead of action being taken against the accused, Seema was transferred the next day, while the male officer remained at the same office.
During the recent hearing, the Court asked the Navy why Seema was denied PC despite being found fit. The Navy’s counsel, Dr. R. Balasubramanian, cited adverse remarks in her Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) from 2016–2019.
Justice Kant rejected this explanation:
“The subject ACRs were overruled by the reviewing authority… it appears the male officer sat over all her hard work and decided she was not fit.”
The Court questioned the mindset behind these ACRs and emphasized:
“Ask them not to make this an ego issue and grant her permanent commission.”
Senior Advocate Rekha Palli, representing Seema, pointed out that men are inducted directly on permanent commission while women are limited to short commission. She also mentioned that there are very few women JAG officers and none have been granted PC so far.
Appearance: Senior Advocates Rekha Palli and Devdatt Kamat, AoR Shivendra Singh, Advocates Bhavya Sharma, Punam Singh, Ajay Desai and Prakriti Rastogi (for petitioner); Senior Advocate Dr R Bala, AoR Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Advocates Vatsal Joshi, Annirudh Sharma Ii, Ishaan Sharma, Sarthak Karol, Mukesh Kumar Singh, Kartikey Aggarwal, Chitvan Singhal, Raman Yadav, Anmol Chandan and Kiran Bala Sahay (for respondents)
Case Title: SEEMA CHAUDHARY Versus GIRIDHAR ARAMANE AND ORS., CONMT.PET.(C) No. 496/2024 in R.P.(C) No. 1036/2023 in C.A. No. 2216/2022
