Indeed, amidst all the talk of reservation for women in legislatures and equality in the workplace, it would be laughable -- if it didn't have such serious repercussions -- that till now a mother could not supervise financial investments for her minor children. Likewise, amidst pronouncements on the imperative for fast-forward economic growth to leapfrog into the 21st century, the Sardar Sarovar project that sought to bring prosperity to western India has only delivered cost over-runs of thousands of crores of rupees. This happened primarily because work on the dam had been stalled for over four years due to a deadlock on the wisdom of raising its height and extreme postures on the definitionof development.

By ruling that both the father and the mother should be treated on par as natural guardians of their minor child, the court has struck at the very root of gender prejudice.

Through such seemingly innocuous practices as requiring the father's, not the mother's, signature on school report cards as too his exclusive endorsement on applications for Reserve Bank of India bonds, generations of children have subconsciously imbibed notions of paternal superiority.

And what of the humiliations suffered by scores of women as they quietly acquiesce to domestic violence and a litany of inequitable traditions, horribly resigned to the certainty of the courts declining to give them custody of their children, unless they are too young to be left entirely to their father, if they walk out of their husband's home? Having said that, guardianship is just one of the pillars of the old order.

Equality will remain a distant chimera if maintenance and inheritance laws remain heavily loaded against women. Notonly are these critical in the quest for gender equality but, declaration of the mother as a natural guardian notwithstanding, the financial independence they confer on women is crucial to secure custody. Moreover, while the domino effect of progressive judgments cannot be gainsaid, tortuous legal processes too have to be reformed to translate the law into reality and thereby ensure progress.

If old prejudices have impeded gender justice, a new environment lobby, seemingly unconcerned about the crores of rupees wasted and the thousands of lives put on hold, has been instrumental in bringing work on the Narmada dam to a standstill. While allowing the Gujarat government to recommence work and raise the height of the dam, the Supreme Court has rightly fixed the focus on the rehabilitation of oustees. The message is clear: nobody's, least of all the oustees', cause is served if the government and activists remain at loggerheads.

And significantly, with the ruling also breaking the deadlock between the Gujaratand Madhya Pradesh governments -- the latter has made a passionate submission for a lower height -- a case has been made for development as a venture in inter-state cooperation. Gujarat which showed admirable speed in restarting the work should show similar interest in ensuring that the displaced people are properly rehabilitated.