NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Tuesday took exception to the gender-discriminatory circular of the West Bengal health department, issued 10 days after a woman doctor’s rape-murder on Aug 9 night at the RG Kar Hospital, advising hospitals to limit women doctors‘ duty to 12 hours and avoid assigning them night duties.
A bench of CJI D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra asked senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for the West Bengal govt, how a state could impose such restrictions on women doctors when women as pilots and as part of the armed forces are doing duties in the night.
“How can you discriminate against women, and suggest to govt medical colleges and hospitals to assign only 12-hour duty to women doctors, when their male counterparts would be doing 36 hours of continuous duty,” the CJI-led bench asked.
An unflinching advocate of gender equality both in his judgments and speeches delivered outside the court, the CJI said, “Women professionals do not want concession. They want equal opportunity with security. If it is a 12-hour shift, let it be for all resident doctors irrespective of their gender. The state govt must correct this circular.”
Even though the circular was not mandatory but in the shape of an advisory, Sibal and advocate Astha Sharma said the circular will be amended and these two clauses, objected to by the court and the resident doctors, would be withdrawn.
The bench cited the SC’s judgment in the Anuj Garg case which involved a challenge to the validity of Section 30 of the Punjab Excise Act prohibhiting the employment of women on premises (bars) where people consume liquor or intoxicating drugs. In the 2007 judgment, SC ruled that “instead of prohibiting women employment in the bars altogether the state should focus on factoring in ways through which unequal consequences of sex differences can be eliminated”.
“It is the state’s duty to ensure circumstances of safety which inspire confidence in women to discharge the duty freely in accordance with the requirements of the profession they choose to follow,” SC had ruled.
Deprecating the Delhi govt’s opposition to employment of women in bars citing the Jessica Lal murder case, SC had had allowed men and women below the age of 25 to take up jobs in bars, saying these youngsters graduate in hotel management courses at the age of 22 or 23 years and cannot be prohibited from taking employment in the relevant industry.
A bench of CJI D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra asked senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for the West Bengal govt, how a state could impose such restrictions on women doctors when women as pilots and as part of the armed forces are doing duties in the night.
“How can you discriminate against women, and suggest to govt medical colleges and hospitals to assign only 12-hour duty to women doctors, when their male counterparts would be doing 36 hours of continuous duty,” the CJI-led bench asked.
An unflinching advocate of gender equality both in his judgments and speeches delivered outside the court, the CJI said, “Women professionals do not want concession. They want equal opportunity with security. If it is a 12-hour shift, let it be for all resident doctors irrespective of their gender. The state govt must correct this circular.”
Even though the circular was not mandatory but in the shape of an advisory, Sibal and advocate Astha Sharma said the circular will be amended and these two clauses, objected to by the court and the resident doctors, would be withdrawn.
The bench cited the SC’s judgment in the Anuj Garg case which involved a challenge to the validity of Section 30 of the Punjab Excise Act prohibhiting the employment of women on premises (bars) where people consume liquor or intoxicating drugs. In the 2007 judgment, SC ruled that “instead of prohibiting women employment in the bars altogether the state should focus on factoring in ways through which unequal consequences of sex differences can be eliminated”.
“It is the state’s duty to ensure circumstances of safety which inspire confidence in women to discharge the duty freely in accordance with the requirements of the profession they choose to follow,” SC had ruled.
Deprecating the Delhi govt’s opposition to employment of women in bars citing the Jessica Lal murder case, SC had had allowed men and women below the age of 25 to take up jobs in bars, saying these youngsters graduate in hotel management courses at the age of 22 or 23 years and cannot be prohibited from taking employment in the relevant industry.
#withdraw #dutyhour #curbs #women #rap #India #News #Times #India
