The Supreme Court ordered the Navy Selection Board to reassess Seema Chaudhary's Permanent Commission claim. The ruling underscores that earlier non-recommendations cannot outweigh favourable performance reports.Stock photo used for illustrationNewdelhi,Oct 28, 2026 18:58 ISTThe Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside the Indian Navy Selection Board's April 12, 2024, decision denying Permanent Commission to Seema Chaudhary, a woman officer in its Judge Advocate General Branch, and ordered a fresh assessment within six weeks, news agency Press Trust of India reported.The court held that the selection board had failed to adequately consider Chaudhary's favourable Annual Confidential Reports, or ACRs, and had given undue weight to earlier instances when senior officers did not recommend her for Permanent Commission.A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana directed the board to reconvene and reconsider the officer's claim in line with the court's directions.
It ordered the exercise to be completed within six weeks.The bench said the board had erred by treating the lack of recommendations from successive senior officers as an important factor in assessing her suitability, despite favourable overall assessments of her performance in the confidential reports. It noted that Chaudhary had received the required grading for promotion in most of her ACRs and questioned how an officer who met the prescribed promotion criteria could still be considered unsuitable for Permanent Commission."The overall confidential reports speak of the high performance of the officer.
Such non-recommendations cannot overshadow the overall assessment reflected in those reports," the Chief Justice said, according to PTI. The bench noted that Chaudhary had been recommended for Permanent Commission in 2013 and 2014, while the relevant columns in reports from 2008 to 2012 had been left blank.Holding that the absence of an entry could not be used against the officer, the court directed that the confidential reports covering the period from July 14, 2008, to October 31, 2014, be treated as containing positive recommendations for Permanent Commission.The bench, however, clarified that it was not directing the authorities to consider every ACR from Chaudhary's entire service record.
It said the competent authorities would decide which reports should be considered, subject to the court's directions.The case arose from Chaudhary's challenge to the selection board's April 12, 2024, decision, which followed an earlier judgment in a 2023 review petition. In that judgment, the bench had ordered that her claim be considered on a "standalone" basis, without being influenced by previous consideration of her case for Permanent Commission or observations made by the Armed Forces Tribunal.Chaudhary's counsel argued that the Navy had failed to follow this direction because the selection board again relied on earlier non-recommendations while rejecting her claim.Attorney General R Venkataramani, appearing for the Navy, told the court that the authorities had independently considered the officer's case under Regulation 203 and assessed her suitability on the basis of her confidential reports, PTI reported.He said the fact that successive senior officers had not recommended her for Permanent Commission over five years could not simply be disregarded.
He also argued that Permanent Commission was not an automatic entitlement merely because an officer had received extensions during her Short Service Commission tenure for commendable performance.After examining the original records, the bench identified two main errors in the selection board's assessment: its failure to adequately consider the required promotion grading Chaudhary received in most of her ACRs, and its reliance on earlier non-recommendations despite the favourable overall assessment in those reports. It therefore ordered the board to reconsider her claim within six weeks.- Ends