The Supreme Court’s Lt Col Nitisha judgement exposes indirect discrimination against women in Indian security services, highlighting persistent gender biases.
Authors
Anshuman Shukla, Associate Professor, Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat, India
Sayan Mukherjee, Associate Professor, Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat, India
Ipsita Ray, School of Law, Christ University, Bangalore, India
Summary
The role of women in Indian security services was debated in the recent judgement, Lt Col Nitisha v Union of India. The Supreme Court invalidated the impugned selection criteria and their retrospective application upon female staff as instances of indirect discrimination. This case note identifies three major implications regarding the gendered nature of the debate. Firstly, the Court’s findings reveal that the government adopted certain strategic modes of postfeminist governmentality to utilize the discourse of women empowerment for departmental ends. Secondly, popular readings of the judgement risk being reduced to postfeminist cultural sensibilities, which romanticize individualistic agency and manufacture isolated struggling heroes to eventually dull the cross-sectoral feminist solidarity. Lastly, the Court’s progressive doctrinal turn still construed women officials as mere employees-beneficiaries mostly claiming careerist interests. It abandoned any holistic appraisal of the role of women in military service, thereby articulating an impoverished account of female agency, dignity, and personhood.
Published in: Indian Law Review
To read the full article, please click here.
