If a woman can fly Rafale fighter jet in the Indian Air Force, then why are fewer women officers in gender neutral posts of Judge Advocate General (legal) branch of the Army, the Supreme Court wondered recently and questioned the Centre's rationale on a 50-50 selection criterion.

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan on May 8 reserved its verdict on the plea of two officers Arshnoor Kaur and Astha Tyagi, who despite securing 4th and 5th ranks respectively -- higher in merit than their male counterparts -- weren't selected for the JAG department due to fewer vacancies earmarked for women.

The officers challenged the disproportionate vacancies for men and women and said they could not be selected as there were only three vacancies for women out of the total six posts.

"Prima facie, we are satisfied with the case set up by the petitioner 1 Arshnoor Kaur," the bench noted while reserving its verdict.

The top court went on, "Accordingly, we direct the respondents to initiate whatever action is required for the purpose of her induction in the next available training course for appointment as Judge Advocate General (JAG)".