JUDGMENT K.N. Singh, J. - Generally women have grievance against male chauvinism. The complain that men have upper hand in the society and women are treated in a discriminatory manner. They resent at the popular belief that women belong to weaker section. They assert their right to equality regardless of sex as enjoined by the Constitution. But herein this case a male officer has knocked the door of this Court for justice with a grievance that he is being discriminated against women officers by the State merely on the ground of sex. 2. The petitioner is lecturer in the P.B.A.S. Inter college, Hathras. In 1961 he was commissioned as Second Lieutenant in the National Cadet Corps. Subsequently, he was promoted to the rank of Major. He was by the order dated 27th May, 1980, discharged from service of the National Cadet Corps. with effect from 27-8-1979. He filed a civil suit for a declaration that he was entitled to hold commission in the National Cadet Corps as Major till the age of 52 years but he withdrew the suit and filed the present petition challenging the validity of the order of his discharge. 3. Rule 22 of the National Cadet Corps Rules, 1948, as amended on 21-8-1979, read as under :- "22 Period of Appointment - Subject to the provision, of Part VII of these rules, a person commissioned in the National Cadet Corps shall hold that commission as an officer in that corps shall hold that commission as an officer in that corps until he reaches 45 years of age, when he shall be discharged from the Corps. Provided that if in the opinion of the authority granting him the commission, such person continues to be physically fit and it is necessary or expedient so to do such authority may, during the period up to 31st Dec, 1981 extend the period of commission of such person who has attained the age of 45 years up to the age of 50 years." Under the above rule no officer is entitled to hold commission as an officer in the N.C.C. beyond the age of 45 years. Under the proviso the competent authority has power to grant extension up to the age of 50 years. Under the proviso the competent authority has power to grant extension up to the age of 50 years. Such extension is to be granted if the authority is satisfied that the officer continuous to be physically fit and it is necessary or expedient to allow him to continue in service. Rule 28 lays down that every officer and cadet shall on becoming entitled to receive his discharge under the rule be so discharged with all convenient speed. The petitioner was discharged from the N.C.C. in accordance with Rule 28 (1) read with Rule 22 as amended in August, 1979, after he had attained the age of 48 years. The petitioner made an application for grant of extension but he was not granted any extension. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner assailed the validity of Rule 22 on the ground that it practices discrimination. He argued that under Rule 19 of the National Cadet Corps (Girls Division) Rules, 1949, a female commissioned Officer in the Girls Division is entitled to continue in service until she attains the age of 52 years. He argued that Articles 15 (1) and 16(2) of the Constitution prohibit discrimination on the ground of sex in public employment. Rule 22 practices discrimination as under that rule no male commissioned officer is entitled to continue in service beyond the age of 45 years while under Rule 19 applicable to Girls Division a female commissioned Officer is entitled to continue n service up to the age of 52 years. There is no justification for this discrimination. 5. Article 14 ensures equality before law and the e1quial protection of laws. Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. Clause (1) of Article 15 lays down that the State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex. place of birth or any of them. Clause (3) of the Article lays down that nothing in this Article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children. Clause (3) is in the nature of an exception to Clauses (1) and (2) of Article 15. The state is not entitled to discriminate any citizen on the ground of sex only, but this does not prevent the state from making any special provision for women and children. Article 16 ensures equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. Clause (3) is in the nature of an exception to Clauses (1) and (2) of Article 15. The state is not entitled to discriminate any citizen on the ground of sex only, but this does not prevent the state from making any special provision for women and children. Article 16 ensures equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. Clause (2) of Article 16 declares that no citizen shall be discriminated in respect of any employment or office under the State, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent place of birth residence or any of them. Articles 15 and 16 read together ensure equality to all citizens in matters relating to employment under the State without any discrimination, but the State is not prevented from making any special provision for women. It is open to the State to make laws and rules which may that makes and females differently, but, such differentiation must be reasonable and it must have some reasonable nexus with the object sought to be achieved. Article 14 is general and must read with the other provisions which set out the ambit of fundamental rights. Under Article 14 it is open to the State to treat the two classes differently, Articles 15 and 16 enjoin the State not to discriminate between citizens only on the ground of sex. These Articles of the Constitution do not prohibit the State from making any special provision for women on the ground of sex, coupled with other consideration. 6. In Yusuf Abdul Aziz v. State of Bombay, AIR 1954 SC 321 sex was held to be a permissible classification. The Supreme Court held that sex is a sound classification although there can be no discrimination in general on that ground, the Constitution itself provides for special provisions in the case of women and children. 7. In Miss C.B. Muthamma v. Union of India, AIR 1979 SC 1868 : 1979 Lab IC 1307. Krishna Iyer, J. Speaking for the Court made the following observations :- "We do not mean to universalise or dogmatise that men and women are equal in all occupations and all situations and do not exclude the need to pragmatise where the requirements of particular employment, the sensitivities of sex or the peculiarities of social sectors or the handicaps of either sex may compel selectivity. But same where the differentiation is demonstrable the rule of equality must govern." 8. In Air India v. Nargesh Meerza, AIR 1981 SC 1829 : 1981 Lab IC 1313 the Supreme Court upheld the Regulations 46 and 47 of the Air India Employees Service Regulations which prescribed different period of age of retirement for the Air Hostess. The Supreme Court emphasised that what Articles 15 (1) and 16(2) prohibit is that discrimination should not be made only and only on the ground of sex. These Articles of the Constitution do no prohibit the State from making discrimination on the ground of sex coupled with other considerations. 9. In considering the question of equality it is necessary to bear in mind that the plea of discrimination would arise only where equals are treated differently without any reasonable basis, but, where equals and unequals are treated differently the question of discrimination or denial of equality would have no application. In Nargesh Meerza (supra) the Supreme Court, further, held that even if there be one class of service having several categories with different attributes and incidents such a category becomes a separate class by itself and no difference or discrimination between such category and the general members of the other class would amount to any discrimination or to denial of equality of opportunity. In order to judge whether a separate category has been carved out of a class of services, the following circumstances have generally to be examined :- (a) the nature, the mode and the manner of recruitment of a particular category from the very start. (b) the classification of the particular category. (c) the terms and conditions of service of the members of the category. (d) the nature and character of the posts and promotional avenues and (e) the special attributes that the particular category passes which are not to be found in other classes and the like. 10. While considering the petitioner's plea of discrimination in the matter relating to age of retirement it is necessary to bear the aforementioned principles in mind having regard to the various circumstances, incidents, service conditions etc. of the officers in the National Cadet Corps in Girls Wing. National Cadet Corps Act 1948 provides for the constitution of National Cadet Corps. 10. While considering the petitioner's plea of discrimination in the matter relating to age of retirement it is necessary to bear the aforementioned principles in mind having regard to the various circumstances, incidents, service conditions etc. of the officers in the National Cadet Corps in Girls Wing. National Cadet Corps Act 1948 provides for the constitution of National Cadet Corps. Section 5 provides for three division of the Corps (1) the Senior Division, recruitment to which is made from amongst the students of the male sex of any university; (ii) the Junior Division, recruitment to which shall be from amongst the students of the female sex of any university or school. Section 9 lays down that the Central Government may provide for the appointment of officers in or for any unit of the Corps either from amongst members of the staff of any university or school or otherwise and may prescribe the duties, powers and functions of such offers. Section 10 lays down that no reason subject to the Act shall be virtue of being a member of the Corps be liable to perform such duties and discharge such obligations as may be prescribed. Section 13 provides for making rules to carry out the object of the Act, i.e. the conditions of services, duties and powers of the officers. 11. The Central Government has in exercise of its powers under Section 13 famed two different sets of rules. The National Cadet Corps Rules 1948 make provision for and prescribe conditions of enrolment of cadets, appointment and discharge of officers relating to the male wing. Rule 22 as quoted earlier lays down that an officer of the Corps shall retire on reaching the age of 45 years is applicable for the male division. The other set of Rules are the National Cadet Corps Rules 1949 (Girls Division). These Rules provide for the enrolment of cadets and appointments of the officers, their postings and age of retirement. Rule 19 lays down that a person commissioned as an officer in the Girls' Division of the National Cadet Corps shall hold that commission for a period from the date of her commission until she reaches 52 years of age when she shall be discharged from the Corps. Rule 19 lays down that a person commissioned as an officer in the Girls' Division of the National Cadet Corps shall hold that commission for a period from the date of her commission until she reaches 52 years of age when she shall be discharged from the Corps. Under Rule 16 (Male Division) a person is eligible for appointment to Senior Division and Junior Division of Corps only if he has attained the age of 21 years and has not attained the age of 32 years while in the case of an officer in Girls Division Rule 13 provides that no woman shall be eligible for appointment as an officer in the Girls Division unless she is over 22 years and under 40 years of age. Thus a male teacher of an institution is eligible for appointment till he attains the age of 32 years while a female is eligible for appointment up to the age of 40 years. There is a rational for this differentiation to which we shall refer a little later. The 1948 Rules (for men) and the 1949 Rules both provide for different ages for recruitment and retirement, but both ensure that the male as well as female officers are able to render service for a minimum period of at least 10 to 12 years. These rules prescribe different types of syllabus to train the boys and girls who from distinct separate groups. Rules 32 and 32-A and 33, 34 and 34-A of the 1948 Rules (Males Division) prescribe different period and different class of training to male officers while Rules 30, 31, 33 and 33-A of 1949 Rules (Girls Division) prescribe different period of training to the lady officers. The two rules constitute two different corps and two separate classes. One for male and the other for females and as such they do not form one class. The National Cadet Corpus has two categories one for male and the other for women with different attributes and incidents. Each category forms a separate class itself and it is permissible to treat the two classes differently having regard to the nature mode and manner of recruitment and terms and conditions of service. 12. The National Cadet Corpus has two categories one for male and the other for women with different attributes and incidents. Each category forms a separate class itself and it is permissible to treat the two classes differently having regard to the nature mode and manner of recruitment and terms and conditions of service. 12. In the counter-affidavit and the supplementary counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents it is asserted that the male and female officers of the N.C.C. belong to two distinct and separate cadres regulated by two different sets or rules. Their training is based on different types of syllabus. The age of discharge of girls division officers has been fixed at 52 years which may be extended up to 55 years as the lady officers are not subjected to vigorous training like male officers. Moreover, there is acute problem of the non-availability of the officers in the Girls Division on account of their natural inhibitions as compared to boys division officers. Further, because of social atmosphere prevailing in the country there is non-availability of sufficient number of lady officers in the middle age level group to volunteer for service in the N.C.C. because of their family commitment soon after marriage when they have to attend to their family and children. Consequently, there has been marked reluctance on the part time officer in the N.C.C.. There has been difficulty in obtaining the service of lady teachers as officers of the corps in Girls Division. Experience has shown that lady teachers and professors avoid service in the Corps till they attain the age of 40 years, as during that period they are in the child bearing age group. 13. Keeping all these factors in view the Central Government has framed rules prescribing the upper age limit of 40 years which can be relaxed by permitting to the age of 43 years. When a lady teacher is appointed officer, the Government spends a considerable amount on her training. Since the age of recruitment is 40 years, the Government scheme is to retain the lady officer for at least 12 years in service in order to make the best and full use of her training. In case of male officers upper age limit for recruitment is 32 to 35 years. They are retained normally up to the age of 45 years. In case of male officers upper age limit for recruitment is 32 to 35 years. They are retained normally up to the age of 45 years. Unlike male officers lady officers do not undertake strenuous duties like filed crafts, field training, adventure activities like mountaineering and trekking, para sailing and weapon training which form a part of the training of male officers. On the other hand the lady teachers have to perform and supervise less strenuous duties like drill, training and nursing etc. The difference in the recruitment training and the prevailing circumstances in the society and the various difficulties experienced by the Government in recruiting lady officers have all reasonable bearing in making separate provisions with regard to the age of retirement for male and female officers. In view of the policy and the idea behind the classification as contained in the rules and as set out in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the State it is difficult to hold that the State has practised discrimination only on the ground of sex in providing different age of retirement for male and female officers. 14. We, therefore, hold that Rule 22 which prescribes the age of 45 years for the retirement of a male officer of the National Cadet Corps is not violative of Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution. Similarly Rule 19 of the National Cadet Corps Rules 1949 (Girls Division) which prescribes the age of 52 years for retirement of lady officers does not practise any discrimination. The petitioner who was an officer in the Male Division belongs to different cadre and forms a different group. He is regulated by separate rules. He cannot claim any parity with lady officers to claim a right to continue in service till the age of 52 years. The petitioner having attained 48 years of age has rightly been discharged from service. He is not entitled to any relief from this Court. 15. In the result the petition fails and is accordingly dismissed but, there will be no order as to costs.