The Delhi High Court on Tuesday has raised questions about the reasoning behind the prohibition of men from working as nurses in the Indian Army. The division bench, consisting of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula, inquired about the basis for not allowing men to be employed as nurses in the Army when women can serve in challenging roles such as being stationed at Siachen, the world's highest battlefield.

The court raised this question during its consideration of a petition challenging the Military Nursing Service Ordinance of 1943 and the Military Nursing Service (India) Rules of 1944, particularly concerning their provision that exclusively allows the appointment of women in the Indian Military Nursing Service.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, representing the Central government, informed the Court that the government has submitted its written arguments in the case. She explained that military practices are rooted in established traditions and highlighted that the government had recently introduced legislation to provide reservations for women.

“Yes, in parliament… On one hand you are talking about empowering women and on the other you are saying men cannot join as nurse… If a woman can be posted in Siachen, then a male can work in R&R,” the bench made the response. The government also emphasized that the Supreme Court has recently granted permission for women to enrol in the National Defence Academy

Advocate Amit George, representing the petitioners, (Indian Professional Nurses Association), argued that the Ordinance and Rule preventing men from serving as nurses in the military are rooted in a colonial-era law and are based on Florence Nightingale's perspective of the ideal nurse.

The Court acknowledged the significance of the matter and the need for thorough consideration. As a result, it scheduled the case for further deliberation in November.
The Indian Professional Nurses Association (petitioner) initiated legal proceedings in the High Court in 2018 to challenge the Rules that stipulate the exclusive eligibility of women to join the Military Nursing Service. The petitioner contends that the traditional belief that nursing is a profession exclusively for women is outdated and stems from a time when only women were trained as nurses. However, they argue that the situation has evolved, and there are now several thousand men who have undergone training and have become qualified professionals in the field of nursing.

The association expressed the following in its legal petition. “That this discrimination in the Ordinance and the Rules is palpably contrary to the Constitutional scheme and is, therefore, ex-facie unconstitutional, illegal and arbitrary. Gender equality under the impugned Ordinance and the Rules has remained an elusive Constitutional goal that the Legislature, since the inception of the impugned Ordinance and the Rules, has dispassionately ignored.”

Case: Indian Professional Nurses Association v Union of India