The Supreme Court today decisively invalidated the Indian Army’s gender-based reservation scheme in the Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch where six posts were earmarked for men and only three for women. Describing it as “arbitrary,” the bench asserted that such quotas violate the constitutional guarantee of equality and undermine gender neutrality.

Terming the policy unconstitutional, the Court held that vacancies cannot be restricted by gender and must instead be filled solely based on merit. It directed the government to issue a combined merit list for all candidates, removing any fixed male-female division.

Acknowledging past discrimination, the Court noted the need to ensure fair participation going forward ordering that at least 50% of vacancies should be open to women. However, it emphasized that merit remains the benchmark; merely reserving seats for women even at 50% cannot override superior eligibility among male candidates.

This judgment reinforces that gender neutrality means opportunity is not determined by sex but by qualification. While encouraging increased representation, it rejects surface-level parity in favour of genuine substantive equality.