Latest news with #PermanentCommission
The National
03-07-2025
- Sport
- The National
Two Bilbao supporters given stadium ban after Rangers attack
Rangers faced the La Liga side in the quarter-finals of the Europa League earlier this year, where they exited the competition. The day before the match, Athletic Bilbao fans attacked groups of Rangers supporters and two were arrested. Read more: Spain's Permanent Commission of the State Commission against Violence, Racism, Xenophobia, and Intolerance in Sport met this week to discuss the incidents. And they announced they had punished the two unnamed Bilbao residents for the attack on Rangers fans, which left one hospitalised with a ban on sports stadiums in Spain for one year and a fine of £5,000. They stated: "Violence in sport has no place in Spain and severe measures have been taken." Rangers lost the game in April 2-0 under former boss Barry Ferguson.
Scroll.in
16-06-2025
- General
- Scroll.in
Indian Navy BTech entry 2025: Apply for 10+2 BTech course from June 30
The Indian Navy has invited applications from unmarried men and women for the 10+2 ( Cadet Entry Scheme (Permanent Commission) course, commencing in January 2026 at Indian Naval Academy (INA), Ezhimala. Interested candidates will be able to registerfrom June 30, 2025, at the official website The application window will remain open till July 14, 2025. This recruitment drive is for entry into the Executive and Technical branches, offering a total of 44 vacancies, including a maximum of 6 seats for women. Eligibility Criteria Educational Qualification: Applicants must have passed the Senior Secondary Examination (10+2 pattern) or equivalent with Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics (PCM) and at least 70% aggregate marks, along with 50% marks in English in either Class X or XII. JEE Main 2025: Candidates must have appeared for the JEE (Main) 2025 exam. Selection for the Service Selection Board (SSB) interview will be based on the All India Common Rank List (CRL) published by the National Testing Agency (NTA).
United News of India
22-05-2025
- Politics
- United News of India
SC slams Navy for denying Permanent Commission to woman JAG Officer
New Delhi, May 22 (UNI) The Supreme Court has criticised the Indian Navy for not granting Permanent Commission (PC) to Commander Seema Chaudhary, a woman officer from the 2007 Short Service Commission (SSC) batch in the Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch, despite clear directions given earlier by the top judiciary. A bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh took serious note of the Navy's inaction, making it clear that the court's previous direction to 'consider' the officer's case could not be used as an excuse to avoid action. 'Enough is enough… we give you one week to grant her Permanent Commission,' Justice Kant stated sternly during the hearing. The case revolves around Commander Seema Chaudhary, who has faced prolonged legal battles and filed nearly five petitions seeking justice. Her counsel, Senior Advocate Rekha Palli, argued that while male officers are inducted directly into Permanent Commission, women officers are only taken in through Short Service Commission. She added that currently, there are no women JAG officers in the Navy. After reviewing Chaudhary's service record and performance reports, the court questioned why she was denied PC, especially when she was found fit in all respects. In defence, Senior Advocate Dr. R. Balasubramanian, representing the Navy, pointed to three Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) that included adverse comments. However, the court noted that these ACRs had already been overruled by the reviewing authority. Justice Kant also criticised the bias reflected in the ACRs, implying a male superior had unfairly assessed the officer's work. 'She was graded well in all parameters, and one officer's personal opinion cannot undo her service,' he remarked. The bench reminded the Navy that a 2024 Supreme Court order had already directed reconsideration of the officer's case under Article 142 of the Constitution. The court had ordered that Chaudhary's case be decided independently, as she was the only 2007-batch JAG woman officer eligible for PC. The judgment also permitted the Navy to proportionally increase the number of PC vacancies to accommodate her, ensuring that no other officer would be displaced and that this move would not set a precedent. Justice Kant reminded the Navy's counsel, 'This is not about ego. The 2024 judgment has reached finality. It cannot be ignored at the whims of authorities.' The petitioner alleged that her PC was being denied as retaliation for a workplace harassment complaint she filed against a male officer. A Board of Inquiry reportedly found merit in her complaint, yet she was transferred within a day of filing it, while the accused officer remained in the same post. On the request of Dr. Balasubramanian to seek further instructions, the court agreed to list the matter for further hearing in the first week of July. UNI SNG SSP
The Wire
11-05-2025
- Politics
- The Wire
‘Make Transitional Arrangement': Supreme Court Asks Union Govt to Pause Release of Women Army Officers
Law The Wire Staff Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, representing one of the petitioners, noted that Colonel Sofiya Qureshi would not have been able to lead the 'Operation Sindoor' briefing had the court not enabled PC for women. View of the Supreme Court of India, in New Delhi. Photo: PTI. Real journalism holds power accountable Since 2015, The Wire has done just that. But we can continue only with your support. Donate now New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday (May 9) asked the Union government not to release Short Service Commission (SSC) women Army officers who are challenging the denial of Permanent Commission (PC) to them, The Indian Express reported. The top court emphasised on keeping their morale high, particularly at a time when the government has been visibly platforming women in significant military roles. Presiding over a two-judge bench, Justice Surya Kant observed, 'There is some better place now for them to perform. As of date, we would like their morale to be kept high. Meantime, just utilise their services.' He added, 'It's not your case they are an unsuitable kind of officers,' and suggested making a 'transitional arrangement' until the matter is heard next in August, hinting at the current security climate by saying, 'At this juncture, let us not do something which…' This intervention comes as the government recently showcased women officers, such as Colonel Sofiya Qureshi of the Indian Army and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh of the Air Force, who have been jointly briefing the nation on 'Operation Sindoor' following military strikes. Notably, Col. Qureshi's achievements were acknowledged by the Supreme Court in its landmark February 17, 2020, judgment that granted PC to women officers. That ruling had strongly criticised the government's earlier stance, which had described women as 'physiologically unfit' in a note the court found perpetuated gender stereotypes and termed an 'insult not only to women but also to Indian Army.' During today's hearing, additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati, for the Union government, argued that releasing SSC officers was an administrative decision based on a policy to keep the armed forces young, citing the Army's pyramidal structure. She also stated that women have fared 'far better' in securing PC since its full introduction. Representing Lt Col Geeta Sharma, one of the petitioners, senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy highlighted that Col. Qureshi herself would not have been able to lead the 'Operation Sindoor' briefing had the Supreme Court not enabled PC for women in the 2020 Babita Puniya case. Ms Guruswamy contended that administrative powers could not be an excuse for discrimination and pointed to alleged vacancies. The Supreme Court, while stating it was not ordering a stay on merits at this stage, stressed the need for a blend of young and experienced officers. Justice Kant remarked on the pride felt for officers serving in challenging conditions, noting, 'We now have far excellent officers. We feel proud of them.' The legal battle for women officers seeking PC has been protracted. Even after the 2020 judgment, which had underscored the need for 'administrative will and change in mindset' to overcome gender discrimination, women faced hurdles, including challenges over medical fitness criteria that the top court had previously questioned as potentially unjust. In October 2020, the Supreme Court, then including now-retired Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, had again intervened, noting a 'difference of thinking' between top leaders and Army bureaucracy regarding women's PC. The Supreme Court will hear the current petitions next in August, starting with the Army's case. Law Legal Victories, Lived Defeats: Disability Justice After the 'Courtroom Revolution' View More
India Today
09-05-2025
- Politics
- India Today
This isn't time for court battles: Top court says retain all women officers
This is not the time to have experienced women officers 'running around in courtrooms' or sideline them, said the Supreme Court on Friday, sending a strong message to the armed forces and the government. The court's observation, made during a hearing of the petition filed by Short Service Commission (SSC) women officers who were denied Permanent Commission (PC), came amid the escalating tensions between India and Bench led by Justice Surya Kant made it clear that, for now, the Army must retain those officers still in service. 'There is a better place for them to perform than courtrooms,' Justice Kant said. 'As of date, we would like their morale to be kept high and high like anything.'The court stopped short of passing any order on the merits of the matter but asked the Union government to make transitional arrangements. 'We will decide the legal issues in due course. In the meantime, just utilise their services. It's not your case that they are unsuitable officers,' Justice Kant told Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, who appeared for the Centre. The hearing comes as military personnel are on heightened alert amid hostilities with Pakistan. Justice Kant underscored the importance of experience in the armed forces, saying, 'Of course, the force must always be young ... but young blood also needs to be trained, guided and taught mental temperament. We need a blend of both young and experienced officers.'advertisementReferring to the ongoing situation at the border, he added, 'All of us feel very small before them... That's how much they're doing for us. This is the time when each one of us has to be with them.'Representing one of the petitioners Lt Col Geeta Sharma, senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy argued that Sharma had not yet been dismissed and should be allowed to continue. 'The paperwork shows overwhelming vacancies,' Guruswamy said, adding that Colonel Sophia Qureshi, who recently led the press briefing on Operation Sindoor, wouldn't have had that opportunity had the top court not earlier intervened to secure PC for women countered the claims, stating that Sharma had already been released from service, having not been found eligible for PC during her board review in 2020. 'She served with distinction since 2011. In 2020, her entire batch was considered. She was not found fit for Permanent Commission. She later received a four-year extension and was finally released in 2024,' Bhati the Army's policy, she argued that the service follows a pyramidal structure and can offer PC to only a limited number of officers each year. 'We recruit 600–700 officers annually, but only 250 can be granted PC. The rest can serve up to 14 years. The nation sleeps peacefully because the defence forces are awake,' she court remained unconvinced that the present time, when India faces a military standoff with Pakistan, was the right time for the case hearing. 'We are very proud we have a robust and strengthened force,' Justice Kant said. 'Let's not do something that affects morale. Just utilise whoever is there.'In its interim direction, the court said all women SSC officers currently in service should not be relieved until the next hearing. 'We are not creating any equity in their favour,' the bench clarified, 'but we are saying, don't release them until we decide.'The matter will continue to be heard on merits at a later date.
