The Supreme Court on Friday declined to grant immediate relief to IPS officer Urvashi Sengar’s request to join the ongoing Phase-II training at the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel National Police Academy in Hyderabad. Despite the court not allowing her to join the programme midstream, the court made significant comments on the Centre's 1993 policy that requires a one-year break in training for pregnant IPS probationers after childbirth.
A Bench of the Supreme Court said that allowing Sengar to join the training at this stage would defeat the purpose of the programme as a large portion of the nine-week course had already been completed.
"We agree with your submission on the merits. But we cannot implement it. Three out of nine weeks are already over. You will not be able to be trained properly. It will be to your detriment," the Bench said during the hearing.
The court ended up dismissing the petition, while asking the CAT (Central Administrative Tribunal) to decide Sengar's original application independently and not be influenced by the Supreme Court's views.
Centre Opposed Midway Entry Into Training
Additional Solicitor General Anil Kaushik, appearing for the Centre, told the court that the Phase-II training, which was started on June 22, had already been completed for three weeks.
He said probationers had already undergone important modules (physical training, field visits and cadre-specific sessions) for officers in the Madhya Pradesh cadre. The National Police Academy also requires trainees to maintain a minimum attendance of 95 percent, so Sengar cannot complete the programme if she had missed a significant portion of it.
When the Bench sought details of the training conducted so far, the Centre maintained that the missed modules were integral to the curriculum and could not be replicated separately for one officer.
Sengar’s lawyer argued that since the missed portion could no longer be recovered, she should be allowed to attend the remaining weeks of the programme at least.
But the court declined to do so, saying that allowing an officer to only undergo part of the mandatory training would be unreasonable. While the court could protect her seniority if required, incomplete training would harm her career development overall, the judges said.
Supreme Court Questions 1993 MHA Policy
Though the court did not grant interim relief, it once more expressed reservations about the 1993 Ministry of Home Affairs Office Memorandum which automatically requires pregnant IPS probationers to discontinue training and resume it only one year after childbirth.
In previous hearings, the Bench questioned why a medically fit officer should be prevented from continuing training solely because of a blanket administrative policy.
The judges observed that maternity provisions are intended to protect women employees, not restrict their opportunities if they are medically capable of performing their duties.
The court also stated that post-childbirth recovery varies from one person to another. Some women may need a longer recovery period, while others may be medically fit to resume professional training within a few months. Therefore, the Bench suggested that such decisions should be based on individual medical assessments rather than a uniform rule applicable to all officers.
But the Centre also argued that making exceptions could cause other probationers to make similar demands. Sengar’s legal team countered by claiming exemptions had been granted in the past.
Background of the Case
Urvashi Sengar is a direct recruit IPS officer with the Madhya Pradesh cadre in the batch of 2023 and has already given birth to a child. She received permission to attend the mandatory Phase-II training after she was declared medically fit nine months after delivery.
Her request was rejected by the National Police Academy under the 1993 Office Memorandum. She then approached the Central Administrative Tribunal which granted interim relief allowing her to attend the training subject to medical fitness.
However, the Delhi High Court stayed the CAT's order just before the training commenced, forcing Sengar to move the Supreme Court.
In her petition, Sengar has challenged the constitutional validity of the 1993 Office Memorandum, arguing that it imposes a blanket restriction on pregnant women IPS probationers without taking into account individual medical fitness, advances in medical science or the constitutional principles of equality and non-discrimination.
Although she did not have immediate permission to join the ongoing training, the Supreme Court’s recommendations have revived debate over whether the decades-old maternity policy should be updated to meet modern medical standards and women’s evolving role in India’s police services.
