Calling the termination of a woman employee, on the basis of her being married, as a “coarse case of gender discrimination” and as “constitutionally impermissible”, the Supreme Court has ordered to Centre to pay ₹ 60 lakh as compensation to a military nurse who was removed from service in 1988 after she got married
Consult Verified Legal Experts
- • Agreements
- • Audits
- • Trademark & other IP
Experience
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Rape & POCSO
- • Bail Matter
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Mutual or Contested Divorce
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Mutual or Contested Divorce
Experience
- • Insurance Matters
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Rape & POCSO
Experience
- • Audits
- • Trademark & other IP
- • Company Registration
Experience
- • Anticipatory Bail
- • Money Recovery
- • Cheque Bounce
Experience
- • Money Recovery
- • Cheque Bounce
- • Matrimonial Disputes
Experience
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Rape & POCSO
- • Bail Matter
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Mutual or Contested Divorce
Experience
- • Insurance Matters
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Rape & POCSO
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Mutual or Contested Divorce
Experience
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Rape & POCSO
- • Bail Matter
Experience
- • Anticipatory Bail
- • Money Recovery
- • Cheque Bounce
Experience
- • RERA Matters
- • Case Transfer Matters
- • Succession Issue
Experience
- • Consumer Protection
- • Legal Notice
- • Succession Issue
Experience
- • Insurance Matters
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Rape & POCSO
Experience
- • Agreements
- • Employment Matters
- • Statutory Compliances
Experience
- • Anticipatory Bail
- • Money Recovery
- • Cheque Bounce
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Rape & POCSO
Experience
- • Agreements
- • Employment Matters
- • Statutory Compliances
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Mutual or Contested Divorce
Experience
- • Cyber Crime
- • Anticipatory Bail
- • Money Recovery
Experience
- • Agreements
- • Employment Matters
- • Trademark & other IP
Experience
- • Money Recovery
- • Cheque Bounce
- • Legal Notice
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Mutual or Contested Divorce
Experience
- • RERA Matters
- • Legal Notice
- • Succession Issue
Experience
- • Anticipatory Bail
- • Money Recovery
- • Cheque Bounce
Experience
- • Anticipatory Bail
- • Money Recovery
- • Cheque Bounce
Experience
- • Agreements
- • Employment Matters
- • Statutory Compliances
Experience
- • Property Matter
- • Corporate Issues
- • Startup Compliances
Experience
- • Cyber Crime
- • Anticipatory Bail
- • Money Recovery
Experience
- • Audits
- • Trademark & other IP
- • Company Registration
Experience
- • Anticipatory Bail
- • Money Recovery
- • Cheque Bounce
Experience
- • Cyber Crime
- • Money Recovery
- • Cheque Bounce
Experience
- • RERA Matters
- • Consumer Protection
- • Legal Notice
Experience
- • RERA Matters
- • Case Transfer Matters
- • Legal Notice
Experience
- • Anticipatory Bail
- • Money Recovery
- • Cheque Bounce
Experience
- • Cyber Crime
- • Legal Notice
- • Succession Issue
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Mutual or Contested Divorce
Experience
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Rape & POCSO
- • Bail Matter
Experience
- • Consumer Protection
- • Legal Notice
- • Succession Issue
Experience
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Property Matter
- • Corporate Issues
Experience
- • RERA Matters
- • Case Transfer Matters
- • Cyber Crime
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Mutual or Contested Divorce
Experience
- • Agreements
- • Employment Matters
- • Statutory Compliances
Experience
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Rape & POCSO
- • Bail Matter
Experience
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Property Matter
- • Corporate Issues
Experience
- • Agreements
- • Employment Matters
- • Statutory Compliances
Experience
- • Insurance Matters
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Property Matter
Experience
- • Insurance Matters
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Property Matter
Experience
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Property Matter
- • Corporate Issues
Experience
- • Insurance Matters
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Rape & POCSO
Experience
- • Insurance Matters
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Corporate Issues
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Mutual or Contested Divorce
Experience
- • Agreements
- • Employment Matters
- • Audits
Experience
- • Agreements
- • Employment Matters
- • Statutory Compliances
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Bail Matter
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Rape & POCSO
Experience
- • Matrimonial Disputes
- • Legal Notice
- • Succession Issue
Experience
- • Case Transfer Matters
- • Anticipatory Bail
- • Money Recovery
Experience
- • Cyber Crime
- • Money Recovery
- • Cheque Bounce
Experience
- • Insurance Matters
- • Rape & POCSO
- • Bail Matter
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Mutual or Contested Divorce
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Mutual or Contested Divorce
Experience
- • Rape & POCSO
- • Bail Matter
Experience
- • Agreements
- • Employment Matters
- • Statutory Compliances
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Mutual or Contested Divorce
Experience
- • Agreements
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
Experience
- • Agreements
- • Employment Matters
- • RERA Matters
Experience
- • Employment Matters
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Cyber Crime
Experience
- • Employment Matters
- • Insurance Matters
- • Cyber Fraud
Experience
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Employment Matters
- • Insurance Matters
Experience
- • Bail Matter
Experience
- • Rape & POCSO
Experience
- • Insurance Matters
Experience
- • Adoption & Custody
Experience
- • Court Marriage
Experience
- • RERA Matters
- • Case Transfer Matters
- • Cyber Crime
Experience
- • Rape & POCSO
Experience
- • Insurance Matters
Experience
- • Rape & POCSO
Experience
- • Adoption & Custody
Experience
- • Property Matter
Experience
- • Property Matter
Experience
- • Adoption & Custody
Experience
- • Agreements
- • Anticipatory Bail
- • Case Transfer Matters
Experience
- • Insurance Matters
Experience
- • Employment Matters
- • Insurance Matters
- • RERA Matters
Experience
- • Court Marriage
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Legal Notice
Experience
- • Cyber Crime
- • Rape & POCSO
- • Anticipatory Bail
Experience
- • Rape & POCSO
- • Bail Matter
- • Legal Notice
Experience
- • Employment Matters
- • Company Registration
- • Legal Notice
Experience
- • Cyber Fraud
- • Cyber Crime
- • Legal Notice
Experience
- • Employment Matters
- • Insurance Matters
- • Legal Notice
Experience
- • Adoption & Custody
- • Matrimonial Disputes
- • Legal Notice
Experience
- • Anticipatory Bail
- • Audits
- • Cheque Bounce
Experience
Calling the termination of a woman employee, on the basis of her being married, as a “coarse case of gender discrimination” and as “constitutionally impermissible”, the Supreme Court has ordered to Centre to pay ₹ 60 lakh as compensation to a military nurse who was removed from service in 1988 after she got married.
Facts of the Case
- John was selected for Military Nursing Service (MNS) as a trainee at Army Hospital, Delhi, in December 1982. She was granted commission in December 1985 to the rank of lieutenant in the MNS and posted at Military Hospital, Secunderabad. She then married an Army officer in April 1988.
- However, John was released from the MNS months later in August 1988. She has since alleged she was removed without any show-cause notice or hearing and not given any opportunity to defend her case.
- The regional bench of the AFT in Lucknow set aside her dismissal and ordered a compensation of Rs 5 lakh to John in 2016. The central government and the Army then challenged this order in the Supreme Court.
Decision of the Armed Forces Tribunal-
- As per the order of the AFT, the order of termination of John’s removal was on the basis of her low ACR profile.
- An ACR, or annual confidential report, provides an officer’s performance and potential, as well as provides feedback on areas which they could improve. Salina John, instead alleged that her dismissal was merely due to “personal bias” and that she was not graded low on her ACR. It was claimed that the principal matron of the hospital was annoyed by her marriage to the officer.
- The AFT, while speaking of love, ruled in the favour of John. The AFT said that when the petitioner decided to marry, the respective authorities should have offered their best wishes for the upcoming union and a happy marriage life, but on the contrary they the couple was caused “mental pain and agony”.
- The tribunal observed that as per the service rules, the petitioner had to be removed by the Government after it had obtained the consent of the President, but in this case the removal was ordered by the Lt. Colonel
- The AFTalso found that Selina John’s work was never actually assessed so as to find her unsuitability necessary to make entry in the ACR.
Judgement by the Supreme Court
- In 2019, the Centre filed an appeal against the order of the Tribunal in the Supreme Court, where the case was decided by the bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Dutta of the Supreme Court..
- In the order dated February 14, the Court observed that the judgement of the Tribunal need not be interfered. Though, the rule mentioned in the Army Instruction No. 61 of 1977, titled as “Terms and conditions of service for the grant of permanent commissions in the Military Nursing Service”rule was indeed passed in the year 1977 allowing the dismissal of Military Nursing Service on the grounds of marriage, however it was withdrawn in Aug 1995..
- The Bench observed that the rule was ex facie manifestly arbitrary, as termination of female staff merely because they got married is a case of coarse case of gender discrimination and inequality, and accepting such patriarchal rule is against human dignity, and the right against discrimination as well as fair treatment.
- The Court held that such gender based bias rules are not permissible constitutionally, and thus such dismissal would be unconstitutional.
- The Court ordered the victim to be reinstated in service within a period of three months and in case she reached the age of superannuation of rank, she must be paid a full salary till the age of superannuation, i.e. 55 years or more, with a notional promotion, as well as the required pension and other post-retirement benefits.
- In addition the Court ordered a compensation of Rs 5 lakh to be paid, it observed that it is an irony that the victim had to give 25 years of her life to seek justice from the Court, when it was her who suffered from highhandedness.
The pleasure and happiness of life which was denied to the victim could not be compensated in terms of money, but in a symbolic manner, she is entitled for all the exemplary costs and service benefits in order to maintain the majesty of law in our democratic system.
Email:-helpdesk@sharksoflaw.com
Help Desk:-+91-88770-01993
Adv Vipul Singh Raghuwanshi
Legal expert and contributor at Sharks of Law. Committed to providing clear and accessible legal guidance to everyone.