Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 6672
GAHC010083462025 2025:GAU-AS:15605 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2108/2025 MAJOR NIKLESH KUMAR LOHANI S/O SHRI RAMESH CHANDRA LOHANI, PRESENTLY POSTED AT 30 ASSAM BATTALION NCC, GUWAHATI, KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, SOUTH BLOCK, DHQ P.O, NEW DELHI-110011.
2:THE CHIEF OF THE ARMY STAFF INTEGRATED HQ OF MINISTRY OF DEFENCE (ARMY)
SOUTH BLOCK DHQ PO NEW DELHI-110011
3:THE MILITARY SECRETARY INTEGRATED HQ OF MINISTRY OF DEFENCE (ARMY)
SOUTH BLOCK DHQ P.O NEW DELHI- 110011.
4:THE COMMANDING OFFICER
30 ASSAM BATTALION NCC C/O 99 APO
900828 NARENGI MILITARY STATION GUWAHATI KAMRUP (M).
5:THE COMMANDING OFFICER
24 MECHANISED INFANTRY C/O 56 APO
911724 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R MAZUMDAR, S BORPUJARI,MR. R DEKA,MS T WAPANGLA,MRS P RAI Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., :::BEFORE:::
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE Date on which judgment is reserved : 11.11.2025 Date of pronouncement of judgment : 18.11.2025 Whether the pronouncement is of the operative of the judgment? : No Whether the full judgment has been pronounced? : Yes
Important Points
Subject
Administrative Law - Employment and Public Service
Headnote
(B) Administrative Discretion - The court found no mala fides in the transfer, asserting that administrative authority holds discretion over posting decisions unless statutory provisions are violated. (Paras 19, 31)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a serving Major, challenged his posting order, asserting it jeopardized his child's necessary care due to disability. (Paras 4, 22)
Findings of Court:
The authorities acted within their discretion, focusing on the operational exigencies while acknowledging the child’s need for care. (Paras 27, 36)
Issues: The main issues revolved around the adequacy of the posting policy regarding caregiving for differently abled dependents and the right to joint postings for parents in such cases. (Paras 10, 18)
Ratio Decidendi: The court noted that while both parents are ideally needed, it is not obligatory for authorities to grant joint posting if one parent's presence suffices. (Paras 18, 31)
Result: The court directed reconsideration of the petitioner's representation for joint posting but upheld the current orders pending further review.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: MR. R MAZUMDAR, S BORPUJARI, MR. R DEKA, MS T WAPANGLA, MRS P RAI
For the Respondents: DY.S.G.I.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenged posting based on child's medical needs. (Para 2 , 4 , 10) |
| 2. court highlighted administrative discretion over postings. (Para 31 , 33) |
| 3. reconsideration of joint posting suggested but upheld orders. (Para 35 , 36) |
JUDGMENT & ORDER (CAV)
Heard Mr. N. J. Khataniar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.R. K. D. Choudhury, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for the respondents/Union of India.
2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has put to challenge the impugned order dated 10.01.2025, issued by the Military Secretary, Integrated Headquarter, Ministry of Defence (Army), whereby the petitioner has been posted out of 30 Battalion, National Cadet Corps (NCC), Guwahati, to Mech. Infantry, Jaisalmer, Rajasthan; the order/communication dated 11.04.2025 rejecting the representation of the petitioner and the consequential order/communication dated 17.04.2025 directing him to comply with the posting order dated 10.01.2025.
3. The petitioner is serving as Major in the Indian Army and presently posted at the 30 Battalion, National Cadet Corps (NCC), Guwahati, Assam. By the posting order dated 10.01.2025, issued by the Military Secretary, Integrated Headquarter, Ministry of Defence (Army), the petitioner has been transferred from 30 Assam Bn NCC, Guwahati, to Mech. Infantry, Jaisalmer, Rajasthan. The wife of the petitioner is also serving in the same organization in the rank of Lieutenant Colonel and is presently posted at Headquarters 51 Sub Area, Guwahati.
4. The 4 (four) year old son of the petitioner is diagnosed with Moderate Autism Spectrum Disorder, Attention Deficit Hyper Activity Disorder, Echolalia, Delayed Speech & Language, Poor Socialization with 80% disability which requires specialized medical treatment and therapy, necessitating the presence of both the parents. The disease is said to be a lifelong disease that requires early intervention and continuous care, particularly during first 4 to 8 years of birth of the child. The child of the petitioner has also been assessed by the Associate Professor and Head of Department of Clinical Psychology, Guwahati Medical College & Hospital, who confirmed the aforesaid disorder. It was during this period that the impugned posting order dated 10.01.2025 was issued.
5. Under such circumstances, the petitioner submitted a representation on 24.01.2025 with a request that both he and his spouse, who are serving in the same organization, be considered for registration under provisions of Posting Policy dated 15.12.2014, for posting both of them to a station where adequate medical facilities for treatment and therapy as well as education of their child are available as the interventions are required to be continued at home under the care and guidance of both the parents. The said representation was duly recommended by the Commanding Officer, 30 Bn, NCC, the Group Commander, NCC Group Headquarters, Guwahati as well as the NCC Directorate NER.
6. By the impugned order/communication dated 11.04.2025, the Military Secretary had informed the petitioner that the request of the petitioner for posting under the category of Differently Abled Dependent had been examined and though the Branch expressed empathy for his circumstances, the competent authority, owing to policy constraints, was unable to accede to the request and thereby rejected the representation of the petitioner. Thereafter, the respondent authority issued the impugned order/letter dated 17.04.2025 by directing the petitioner to move in terms of the posting order dated 10.01.2025. 7. The wife of the petitioner had also submitted a representation praying for posting of herself and the petitioner to a station where their son could avail appropriate medical treatment and therapy, which has been accepted by the competent authority in respect of her only vide communication dated 07.04.2025.
8. After rejection of his representation dated 11.04.2025, the petitioner submitted another rep
