1 week ago
Delhi High Court Seeks Centre Reply on Army Gender Gap
The Delhi High Court is examining a complaint about the number of Territorial Army jobs offered to men and women.
The complaint says men receive between 12 and 18 openings, while women receive only one.
Kush Kalra, who filed the case, says this is unfair and may violate the Constitution.
He also says it goes against a 2018 court decision.
That decision said women should be allowed to join the Territorial Army.
The court has asked the central government to explain its recruitment practice.
The government has not yet given its response in the report.
The court will consider the issue after receiving that response.
The Delhi High Court asked the Centre to respond to a petition challenging gender disparity in Territorial Army officer recruitment.
The petition alleges that authorities reserve 12 to 18 vacancies for men but only one vacancy for women in recruitment cycles from 2022 to 2026.
Petitioner Kush Kalra argues that the practice violates the Constitution and undermines the High Court’s 2018 ruling allowing women to join the Territorial Army.
The 2018 judgment held that the phrase “any person” in Section 6 of the Territorial Army Act, 1948 includes both men and women.
A bench led by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya issued notice to the government, which has been asked to file its reply.
- Who
- The Delhi High Court, the Centre, and petitioner Kush Kalra.
- What
- The court sought the Centre’s response to a petition alleging gender disparity in Territorial Army officer recruitment.
- Where
- The Delhi High Court in New Delhi.
- When
- Wednesday, September 23; the year is not specified in the report. The petition refers to recruitment cycles from 2022 to 2026.
- Why
- The petition alleges that reserving 12 to 18 vacancies for men and only one for women is unconstitutional and undermines the court’s 2018 ruling permitting women’s entry into the Territorial Army.
Petitioner’s position
Government’s position
Recruitment vacancies
Petitioner’s position
Kush Kalra alleges that allocating 12 to 18 vacancies to men and only one to women is discriminatory, unconstitutional, and a form of tokenism.
Government’s position
The Centre and other respondents have been asked to respond; their position is not stated in the report.
2018 judgment
Petitioner’s position
The petition says the recruitment practice undermines the 2018 judgment that interpreted “any person” under Section 6 of the Territorial Army Act, 1948 to include men and women.
Government’s position
The government has not yet explained how the current vacancy allocation complies with the 2018 judgment.
Key facts
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Petitioner
- Kush Kalra
- Alleged male vacancies
- 12 to 18 per recruitment cycle
- Alleged female vacancies
- One per recruitment cycle
- Recruitment cycles cited
- 2022 to 2026
- Earlier ruling
- A 2018 Delhi High Court judgment allowed women to enter the Territorial Army.
Quotes
Kush Kalra
Petitioner challenging the gender-based vacancy allocation in Territorial Army officer recruitment
“However, allowing women entry into the Territorial Army was only half a measure.”
theprint.in
Sources
Related news
Delhi High Court Asks Government to Decide on Women’s Quota
Supreme Court Presses Coast Guard on Women’s Permanent Commissions
Supreme Court Awards ₹12 Lakh to Woman Denied LPG Job
Delhi High Court Seeks Fair Maternity Guidelines for Wrestlers
Calcutta High Court Grants Relief to Army Aspirant
Delhi High Court Weighs Maternity Rules Against Sporting Careers
Amit Shah Cancels Scheduled Telangana Visit Over Delhi Engagement
Rajiv Gauba urges adaptable regulation balancing innovation, growth and accountability
NDMC Suvidha Camp Receives 91 Grievances, Deploys Over 100 Officials
Parliamentary Standing Committees Reconstituted for 2026-27
Thhiya Aims to Simplify Global Workforce Provider Decisions
