Bengaluru: A married daughter remains a daughter in the same manner that a married son remains a son, the Karnataka High Court has ruled while quashing a Sainik Welfare Board guideline that barred married daughters from availing dependent cards available to the children of ex-defence personnel.
“If the son remains a son, married or unmarried; a daughter shall remain a daughter, married or unmarried. If the act of marriage does not change the status of the son; the act of marriage cannot and shall not change the status of a daughter,” a single judge bench of the Karnataka HC ruled in an order on January 2.
The HC has also asked the Central Government to stop referring to former defence personnel as ex-servicemen on account of the changing gender equations in the forces and to consider the gender-neutral nomenclature of ex-service personnel.
Justice M Nagaprasanna of the Karnataka HC issued the orders in the course of hearing a plea filed by the 31-year-old daughter of a former army man Subedar Ramesh Khandappa Police Patil who was martyred while clearing mines during ‘Operation Parakram’ in the year 2001.
Priyanka Patil, the daughter of the former Madras Engineer Group (MEG) Subedar, who was 10 years old when her father died, approached the Karnataka HC in 2021 over a refusal by the Sainik Welfare Board to issue a dependent card to her on the grounds that she was married.
Priyanka Patil sought to be identified as the daughter of former defence personnel to avail 10 per cent reservations made by the Karnataka government for the kin of ex-service personnel during the recruitment of assistant professors in government degree colleges in the state in 2020.
She was denied the card since the Sainik Welfare rules stipulate that dependent cards can be issued only to unmarried persons in the case of women.
The Karnataka HC, after considering the positions taken by constitutional courts in cases where discrimination was alleged against married daughters for compassionate appointments, kerosene licences, and other benefits, ruled that discrimination on the basis of gender is “violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India” which guarantees equality.
“Therefore, the very object with which the welfare schemes are created for the benefit of the kith and kin of deceased ex-servicemen is taken away, because the petitioner is the daughter and the daughter is married. If the ex-servicemen had sons, marriage would not have made any difference,” the Karnataka HC ruled.
“It is for this reason the guideline falls foul of the tenets of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The guideline is a depiction of gender stereotypes that existed decades ago, and if permitted to remain would be an anachronistic obstacle in the march to women’s equality,” Justice M Nagaprasanna said.
The guidelines for issuing ID cards to the dependents of ex-service personnel “portray discrimination on the basis of gender and cannot be permitted to remain as a guideline. Therefore, the guidelines will fly on the face of the tenets of Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution of India,” the HC said.
The court held that if any rule or policy or guideline is in violation of the rule of equality then they “cannot but be obliterated, as being unconstitutional”.
“I hold that exclusion of married daughter for grant of an I-card in terms of guideline 5(c) of the guidelines for issuance of I-cards to dependants of ex-servicemen to be violative of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India and accordingly, I strike down and annihilate the words “till married” in the aforesaid guideline,” Justice Nagaprasanna said.
The HC has directed the Karnataka Examination Authority to consider the case of Priyanka Patil under the ex-servicemen quota for the post of Assistant Professor in terms of a job notification issued on August 26, 2021.
The HC has also directed the Central Government to move in tune with changes in society and to use gender-neutral nomenclature for its various programmes and initiatives.
“It is the nomenclature of the guidelines that seek to portray discrimination. The word used in the nomenclature is ex-servicemen. The word “men” in the title portrays such discrimination as it seeks to demonstrate that the forces are still a bastion of the male, while it is not,” the HC has observed.
“There was a time when women had no combatant role in any Force. There is a paradigm shift from the past. Women have reached combatant services in supervisory roles as officers and on other responsibilities, be it in the Indian Army, the Indian Air Force, and the Indian Navy. This is in the public domain,” the HC pointed out.
The court observed that the word ‘men’ in the title, as part of the word ex-servicemen, would seek to demonstrate a misogynous posture of an age-old masculine culture. “Therefore, the title wherever it reads as ex-servicemen in the policy-making annals of the government, be it the Union or the State concerned, should be made “gender neutral”, the Karnataka HC ruled.
“There has to be a change in the mindset of the rule-making authority or the policy-makers, it is only then there could be recognition of a commitment to the values of the Constitution, as equality should not remain a mere idle incantation, but has to be a vibrant living reality,” the court said.
—Agencies

KR Desk