- A petition was made in the Delhi High Court about 20 "Air Force (i) Flying" vacant posts advertised on 17 May 2023
- The case came up for hearing before a Division Bench comprising Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla
- The Court observed that the petitioner had a "fit to fly" certificate and cleared all examination rounds
The Delhi High Court considered a petition to direct the filling in of 20 vacant "Air Force (i) Flying" posts under the Examination Notification dated May 17, 2023 in a case argued before a Division Bench of C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla, JJ.
The Court held that the petitioner was eligible for appointment because he has "Fit to Fly" certificate; the petitioner cleared all rounds of the examination. The Court added that no stipulation, advertisement or notification could be read in a gender biased manner.
The Court determined that it was arbitrary for the respondents to leave 20 posts vacant as "Air Force (i) Flying" vacancies and ordered the petitioner be appointed to one of the positions.
On 17 May 2023, the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) released an Examination Notice for recruitment via the National Defence Academy (NDA) and Naval Academy Examination, which contained an announcement of 92 vacancies under "Air Force (i) Flying", which calculate to two for female candidates.
The Petitioner had appeared for the examination and was present in the final merit list published by the Ministry of Defence on 2 April 2024, consisting of 699 candidates.
Out of the posts advertised, two female-reserved vacancies did fill; however, with only 70 unreserved posts being filled by male candidates, 20 total unreserved vacancies were not filled.
The Court commented that 90 vacancies in the examination notice were not made indicative as being only for men and that a reading of the notice as excluding women sufficiently dissuaded them from applying and that women were, therefore, discriminated against.
The Court reiterated its postulate that recruitment must be consistent with notions of gender neutrality and referred, as supporting evidence, the Supreme Court's ruling in Arshnoor Kaur v. Union of India, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1668.
The Bench indicated that the 90 vacancies were available to appoint male or female candidates. As only 70 male candidates were qualified, the remaining vacancies could be filled with qualified female candidates.
The Court indicated that any vacancies remaining after appointing qualified female candidates could be filled through other recruitment methods.
The Court ordered that the respondents should appoint the petitioner immediately against one of the vacancies that still required to be filled.
The Court also stated that she and the 70 male and 2 female candidates who have already been appointed through the same examination should receive the same service benefits including seniority and entitlements.
Current Issue
