Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5
CASE NO.:
Transfer Case (civil) 38 of 2002
PETITIONER:
Jasbir Kaur & Ors.
RESPONDENT:
Union of India & Ors.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13/11/2003
BENCH:
K.G.Balakrishnan & B.N.Srikrishna
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
With
Transfer Case (C) Nos.39-42 of 2002
Transfer Case (C) No.46 of 2002,
Transfer Case(C) Nos.54-56 of 2002,
Transfer Case(C) No.70 of 2002,
Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.12904-12909 of 2002,
Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.14275 of 2002 and
Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.14487 of 2002,
SRIKRISHNA, J.
The only issue thrown up by this group of ca
ses is : ’What should be the uniform to be worn by members
of the Military Nursing Services?’ Persistence of parties and
ingenuity of counsel have succeeded in giving a constitutional
moment to an issue which is but an one of administration of an
auxiliary branch of the Armed Services.
A force called Indian Military Nursing Service was
constituted as part of the armed forces of the Union of India by
Ordinance No.XXX of 1943 titled The Indian Military Nursing
Service Ordinance, 1943, which was brought into force on 15th
September, 1943. Section 3 of the said Ordinance declares that
there shall be raised and maintained in the manner provided in the
Ordinance "as part of the armed forces of the Union and for service
with the Indian Military forces" an auxiliary force which shall be
designated as Indian Military Nursing Service. The Ordinance
prescribes the conditions of eligibility for appointment in section 6.
Section 9 of the Ordinance provides that the provisions of the
Indian Army Act, 1911 shall, to such extent and subject to such
adaptations and modifications as may be prescribed, apply to
members of the Indian Military Nursing Service as they apply to
Indian commissioned officers, unless they are clearly inapplicable
to women.
Section 10 of the said Ordinance empowers the Central
Government to make Rules to carry out the purposes of the
ordinance and section 11 vests in The Chief of the Army Staff the
power to make regulations providing for all matters to be laid
down and generally for all detail connected with the organisation,
pay allowances, duties, discipline, training, clothing, equipment
and leave of members of the Indian Military Nursing Service.
In exercise of the powers vested in him The Chief of Army
Staff prescribed the appropriate uniform to be worn by the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 5
members of the Indian Military Nursing Service. The prescribed
uniforms were changed from time to time taking into account the
advice of special committees appointed by The Chief of the Army
Staff to periodically review the issue.
Despite the fact that the Indian Military Nursing Service
(hereinafter called as ’IMNS’) has been made an auxiliary force,
the members of this service are not subject to all the provisions of
the Army Act and have been treated separately while being part of
the Indian Army.
By an order dated 25.1.2000 the Additional Director General
of Military Nursing Service issued a Dress Code for members of
IMNS prescribing the Dress Code for different purposes. We are
not concerned with the details of the prescribed uniforms for that
in no way affects the legal issue sought to be canvassed before the
Court. Nor are we really concerned with the reasons which
impelled the appropriate authority to prescribe any particular dress
as the uniform to be worn by the members of the IMNS. However,
it appears that a number of problems were faced in the hospital
environment in the wake of the dress code issued by the letter
dated 25.1.2000. These problems were brought to the notice of
Medical Services Advisory Committee. With an intent to solve
these problems, which pertained to patient care related issues, a
decision was taken to modify the dress code by an order issued on
11.9.2001. The said order was challenged by members of IMNS
by different writ petitions before several High Courts, inter alia, on
grounds of violation of the Fundamental Rights under Articles 14
and 21 of the Constitution. The Bombay, Allahabad and
Karnataka High Courts dismissed such writ petitions on the ground
that no issue pertaining to Fundamental Rights arose and
observing that the issue of prescribing uniform for the IMNS was a
matter well within the competence of the military authorities.
Some other High Courts in the meanwhile admitted similar writ
petitions and issued interim orders. Special leave petitions were
moved against the decisions of the Allahabad, Bombay and
Karnataka High Courts in this Court. To avoid inconsistency in
judicial decisions, this Court admitted the special leave petitions
and also transferred all the pending writ petitions to itself by an
order made on 28.1.2002 in Transfer Petition (C) Nos.851-857 of
2001, which reads as follows:
"We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
The writ petitions mentioned in prayer
column of these petitions, in our opinion,
involves substantial question of law. Therefore,
it is just necessary this issue should be decided
by a single court. Taking into consideration the
importance of the issue, we think it appropriate
that these petitions should stand transferred to
this court for disposal in accordance with law. It
is so transferred.
It is pointed out that some of the High
Courts have issued interim orders in favour of
the petitioners. If it is so, those interim orders
will continue until further orders of this Court.
Accordingly, these petitions are allowed.
The writ petitions stand transferred to this
Court.
Liberty to file additional documents."
When these petitions came up for hearing on 6th May, 2002
it was represented to this Court that the Union of India wanted to
appoint a Review Committee to consider the question of uniform
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 5
to be worn by the nurses in the Army. This Court made the
following order:
"Upon hearing counsels the Court
made the following order:
There shall be an interim order
maintaining status quo in regard to the
uniform of Nurses concerned in these
petitions. Uniform they are wearing as on
today shall be continued to be worn. If by
virtue of interim orders of the High Court or
otherwise at different places different
uniforms are being worn, same shall
continue till the disposal of these petitions.
List these matters for final disposal in
the month of September 2002. In the mean
time if the Union of India wants to appoint a
review committee to consider the question
of uniform to be worn by the Nurses in the
Army, they are free to do so and report to
this Court."
The Union of India thereafter constituted a Committee
known as ’Military Nursing Service Dress Review Committee’
which was composed of the Director General of Medical Services
(Army), as the Chairman, and representatives from the Director
General of Armed Forces Medical Service, representative from
DGMS (Army), representative from DGMS (Navy), representative
from DGMS (Air Force), Dy. Judge Advocate General and ADG
Military Nursing service as members. The terms of reference of
this Committee were the following:
"Terms of Reference
1. To carry out a comprehensive review of the
MNS Dress Code from its inception to the
present dress code as promulgated vide army HQ
letter Nos:
(a) B/70001/DGMS-4A dt. 25 Jan 2000
(b) B/42706/AGREEMENT/CW-1 dated 11
September 2001 as amended vide our letter No.
B/42706/AGREEMENT/CW-1 dated 25 October
2001
2. To Ascertain and deliberate upon various
issues raised by MNS against the existing dress
code so promulgated and analyse the cause of
objection to the same including the issue of
dress violations.
3. To go into all the issues involved and
suggest a dress code, whether it be the existing
dress duly modified, or a new dress code. The
dress code so recommended should be befitting,
serve functional requirement and be in keeping
with the ethos and requirement of the Medical
Services.
4. To ensure that the dress code so
recommended facilitates the efficient discharge
of the primary duty of the MNS staff which is
of patient care and efficient management of
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 5
patient wards.
5. In consonance with the directions of the
Court it is to be ensured that there is a clear
difference and distinction in terms of dress
between the doctors and the nurses.
6. To go into the universality of dresses as
worn by nursing staff in other major civil
hospitals, para military hospitals and where
possible nursing staff of foreign armies to draw
suitable parallels to help evolve a befitting
dress code.
7. While making its recommendations on the
dress code the issue of any expenditure and its
financial implications thereto should be borne
in mind and recommendations made thereto.
8. The Committee will also lay down the
channel of promulgation of the new dress code
including the recommended time frame for its
implementation."
The Dress Review Committee held its deliberations on 8th
and 9th July 2002 and made a report. Though Major General P.K.
Sethi, Addl DGMNS and Brig.(Mrs.) Usha Sikdar, DDMNS
Central Command, were members of the Committee, they
expressed their reservations with regard to the report and gave
dissenting notes.
The Dress Review Committee went into the historical
background of the constitution of the Military Nursing Service as a
separate cadre, the applicable dress regulations for the different
services and the problems faced in the hospital environment,
which were brought to its notice. It also took into account a
number of objections made by the IMNS questioning the
rationality and validity of the 11th September 2000 order. The
Dress Review Committee meticulously considered the objections
and having considered various options found in favour of the
Safari Suit of soothing colour (Beige colour) in suitable fabric
with badges of rank on shoulders to meet the seasonable
requirements of summer and winter, as the best available option. It
also recommended that the change over should be effected within a
time frame of three months and that the cost of the recommended
dress should be borne by the Government as one time measure in
the form of an ’outfit allowance’ by obtaining necessary sanction
from the competent authority.
A copy of the Dress Review Committee report has been
placed on the record before us and learned counsel have taken us
through it.
Learned counsel, Mr. R. Venkataramani and Mr.
M.N.Krishnamani, appearing for petitioners in different cases,
basically urge two contentions. They contend that the prescribed
uniform violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. When it
was pointed out to the learned counsel that there was no question
of Article 21 being considered unless they were able to
demonstrate that the prescribed uniform was outrageous of
modesty and dignity of womanhood or that it was so inconvenient
as not to bear the onslaughts of nature, both learned counsel did
not press the contentions based on Article 21. They however,
contended that Article 14 was violated as the uniform was intended
to discriminate against the members of the IMNS by making them
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 5
out to be a separate class.
In our view, the contention is entirely misconceived and
unfounded. That the Indian Military Nursing Service is a separate
class, sui generis, even though an auxiliary force of the Indian
Military, is an undeniable fact. The historical background in which
this force was established and the legal provisions applicable to it
leave no manner of doubt that notwithstanding that it is a part of
the Indian Army, IMNS is a distinct but separate class by itself. In
any event, whether any part of the military services should have
any uniform, and, if so, what should be the uniform, is an issue
entirely within the province of The Chief of Army Staff by reason
of Army Act, the Indian Military Nursing Act and the Regulations
made by the Chief of Army Staff by the powers derivable
therefrom. We see no scope for application of Article 14 in such
matters, nor is any case made out therefor.
A major grievance made on behalf of the petitioners was
that no heed was paid to their objections before the Dress Code
was finally decided. Even if true, the contention has lost its force
presently. When taken through the Dress Review Committee’s
Report by the learned Additional Solicitor General, we noticed that
the said Committee has meticulously applied its mind to several
objections raised by the representatives of the IMNS. Each
objection has been carefully examined and appropriate
recommendation has been made by the review committee.
Apart from affording an opportunity of putting forth their
views in the matter, the members of IMNS could not have asked
for anything higher. Each grievance has been carefully considered
and addressed by the Dress Review Committee, and it is for the
army authorities to take appropriate decision. A decision such as
the one challenged before us can hardly be faulted unless on the
ground of Wednesbury principle of rationality. In our view there is
no such irrationality in the decision of the Army Act which
requires us to interfere in exercise of our constitutional powers.
The petitions have no merit and are liable to fail.
The members of the IMNS have the glorious role model of
the ’Lady with the Lamp’, Florence Nightingale, who went
around on the battle field, caring more for the patients than for her
own life. We hope that the shining example of the Lady with the
Lamp shall continue to be emulated by the members of the Indian
Military Nursing Service.
All the petitions dismissed. Interim orders vacated. The
respondents are at liberty to take any appropriate decision.
There shall be no order as to costs.