IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, Manoj Jain, JJ.
Hav. Manish Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 3414 of 2019 & & CM APPL. 35055 of 2023
Decided On : 07-08-2023
Posting Policy - Indian Army - [No specific act section referenced]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought posting to a place with medical facilities for his dependents. He was initially posted to Delhi for 5 years, and then sought to be posted to a field regiment in Baramulla. The respondents intended to post the petitioner to Kolkata where medical and educational facilities were available.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the needs and necessities of an individual in the Armed Forces would always be subservient to the needs of the Army. The court concluded that the respondents had duly complied with the directions of the posting policy and dismissed the petition.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner should be posted to a place with medical and educational facilities for his dependents, in accordance with the posting policy.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that no individual in the Armed Forces can have a posting of his or her choice, and that the competent authority must consider several factors while determining postings, balancing the needs of the service with the needs of the individuals.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was granted 45 days to join the place of posting.
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral)--Petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing a writ petition being W.P. (C) No. 11095/2017 seeking posting to a place where medical facilities for treatment of his dependants are available. By order dated 25.04.2018, this Court directed that petitioner be attached to a Unit in Delhi for a period of 2-3 months.
2. Petitioner was accordingly attached to a Unit in Delhi. Thereafter in 2019, petitioner was sought to be posted to a field regiment in Baramulla. Petitioner impugned the said order by filing the present petition.
3. By an interim order dated 03.04.2019, respondents were directed to maintain status quo with regard to the posting of the petitioner.
4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that son of the petitioner is suffering from spastic diplegia. Learned counsel submits that treatment for the son of the petitioner is not available at all Units.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the posting policy dated 09.04.2012 to contend that petitioner should be required to be given three choices of stations as per availability of medical facilities and accordingly posted to only one of the three places as per his choice.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents disputes the same. He however concedes that the son of the petitioner has the specified medical ailment and is presently under treatment.
7. Learned counsel further submits that posting policy is subservient to the interest of the Force and the petitioner is sought to be posted at a place where there are appropriate medical facilities available to meet the specialist treatment required by his son. He further submits that there are several other Junior Commissioned Officer with family members having medical issues and who are waiting for their postings at Delhi. He submits that petitioner by way of the interim order has already spent nearly 5 years in Delhi.
8. On 06.07.2023, contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner was noted that the treatment for the child of the petitioner as well as education is only available in Delhi. This was disputed by learned counsel for the respondents who had sought time to place on record other Units where both medical and educational facilities would be available.
9. On 07.07.2023, respondents had stated that they intended to post the petitioner at a place where adequate medical and educational facilities were available. Subsequently, an affidavit has been filed wherein it is stated that the respondents have decided to post petitioner to Kolkata where requisite medical facilities are available at the Command Hospital (Eastern Command Kolkata) and also education facility is available for the son of the petitioner.
10. Learned counsel for the petitioner had stated that in terms of the policy, petitioner would like to be posted in Lucknow, Chandi Mandir or Pune.
11. Learned counsel for the respondents on 25.07.2023 had stated that the competent authority had considered the case of the petitioner and found that it was not feasible to post petitioner to either Lucknow, Chandi Mandir or Pune. It is stated that petitioner belongs to Clerk Trade in the Artillery Regiment and only 3% officers are serving as Clerk in the Artillery Regiment and accordingly there is shortage of manpower at the Units. It was further stated that all facilities for treatment and education are available at Kolkata.
12. On 25.07.2023, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for time to ascertain as to whether the medical and educational facilities required by the petitioner and his family are available at Kolkata or not. The matter was listed for today for arguments.
13. Though, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued, he has not pointed out any deficiencies or unavailability of medical or educational facilities in Kolkata where petitioner is sought to be now posted.
14. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that respondents should follow t
The needs and necessities of an individual in the Armed Forces are subservient to the needs of the Army, and postings are determined based on various factors, balancing the needs of the service with ....
Transfer and posting decisions in a disciplined force are made by the competent authority in the interest of the Force, and individual requests for specific locations may not be entertained.
The normal tenure for posting is not mandatory and can be curtailed for exigencies of service.
Compassionate grounds for posting must consider the medical needs of dependents requiring constant supervision and assistance.
The court balanced the petitioner's family health issues and impending retirement with the concession granted for seeking a terminal posting, in deciding not to interfere with the posting order.
The court considered the medical condition of the petitioner and his daughter as a determining factor in reaching its decision.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the seriousness of medical conditions and entitlement to relief for transfer on compassionate grounds or for medical reasons are determined ba....
Discretionary power of competent authority in transfer orders is not to be interfered with unless shown to be arbitrary or mala fide.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.