<p class="title">“Why do women try to be equal to men when they can be far ahead of men,” the Centre on Wednesday told the Supreme Court, as it opposed a plea for command positions for women in Indian Army due to physiological limitations and domestic obligations.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The Centre maintained that it was always advisable to keep women away from combat positions as their capture by enemies as prisoners of war would be “extreme physical, mental and physiological stress for the individual and the organisation and overall by the government”.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Centre, also referred to operational effectiveness, exigencies of services and physical capabilities, among others, to contest the Delhi High Court's judgement passed in March 2010 for granting permanent commission to women officers.</p>.<p class="bodytext">A bench presided over by Justice D Y Chandrachud told the government to consider implementing the 2010 judgement saying it was possible with the change of mind-set as the court decided to take up the matter for combat role for women in Navy and Air Force on Tuesday.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The government has maintained most of the countries whose armies have women as officers also have women in their rank and file with the exception of India, Pakistan and Turkey.</p>.<p class="bodytext">“This results in a unique 'all-male' environment in a unit where the presence of women officers requires moderated behaviour in their presence. Posting of women officers in all-male units thus has its own peculiar dynamics,” it said.</p>.<p class="bodytext">It also said the composition of rank and file being male, predominantly drawn from rural background and with prevailing societal norms, troops were not "yet mentally schooled" to accept women officers in command of units.</p>
<p class="title">“Why do women try to be equal to men when they can be far ahead of men,” the Centre on Wednesday told the Supreme Court, as it opposed a plea for command positions for women in Indian Army due to physiological limitations and domestic obligations.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The Centre maintained that it was always advisable to keep women away from combat positions as their capture by enemies as prisoners of war would be “extreme physical, mental and physiological stress for the individual and the organisation and overall by the government”.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Centre, also referred to operational effectiveness, exigencies of services and physical capabilities, among others, to contest the Delhi High Court's judgement passed in March 2010 for granting permanent commission to women officers.</p>.<p class="bodytext">A bench presided over by Justice D Y Chandrachud told the government to consider implementing the 2010 judgement saying it was possible with the change of mind-set as the court decided to take up the matter for combat role for women in Navy and Air Force on Tuesday.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The government has maintained most of the countries whose armies have women as officers also have women in their rank and file with the exception of India, Pakistan and Turkey.</p>.<p class="bodytext">“This results in a unique 'all-male' environment in a unit where the presence of women officers requires moderated behaviour in their presence. Posting of women officers in all-male units thus has its own peculiar dynamics,” it said.</p>.<p class="bodytext">It also said the composition of rank and file being male, predominantly drawn from rural background and with prevailing societal norms, troops were not "yet mentally schooled" to accept women officers in command of units.</p>
