Delhi High Court Upholds Transfer Order of Paramilitary Officer Despite Medical and Familial Concerns

Court dismisses petition challenging transfer from Delhi to Bhopal, citing lack of extreme hardship or violation of guidelines

In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court dismissed a petition filed by Dr. Aditya Sehrawat, challenging his transfer from Delhi to Bhopal. Dr. Sehrawat, a Deputy Commandant (Medical) with the Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB), sought to have his transfer order set aside on medical and familial grounds. The court, however, found no merit in his claims of extreme hardship or violation of established guidelines.

The petitioner argued that his ongoing medical treatment following a liver transplant necessitated his stay in Delhi. He contended that the Department of Liver Sciences at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) in Bhopal was inferior to the Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences (ILBS) in Delhi, where he had been receiving treatment. However, the court noted that Dr. Sehrawat’s own treating doctor at ILBS had certified that follow-up care could be adequately conducted at AIIMS Bhopal, with only periodic visits to Delhi.

Additionally, Dr. Sehrawat cited his father’s disability as a reason to remain in Delhi. The petitioner's father, suffering from a disability since 1981, was claimed to require his care. The court, however, found that adequate facilities in Bhopal could cater to his father’s needs, dismissing the argument as insufficient for staying the transfer.

The bench, comprising Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla, emphasized that the court's interference in transfer orders, particularly in paramilitary forces, is limited to cases involving a transgression of guidelines or extreme hardship. The court noted that while many personnel seek to remain in preferred postings for personal reasons, these do not constitute grounds for judicial intervention unless backed by compelling evidence of hardship or guideline violations.

The ruling underscores the court’s stance that transfer orders, which are an administrative prerogative, should not be lightly interfered with unless there is clear evidence of malfeasance or undue hardship. The court reiterated that paramilitary personnel must adhere to transfer guidelines, which are crafted to ensure operational efficiency and personnel welfare.

The dismissal of the petition reaffirms the judiciary's role in maintaining a balance between individual grievances and organizational needs, ensuring that the latter is not compromised without substantial justification.

Bottom Line:

Transfer of paramilitary personnel - Court cannot interfere in transfer orders unless there is a transgression of established guidelines or extreme hardship is demonstrated.

Statutory provision(s): Constitution of India, Article 226; Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016

Dr. Aditya Sehrawat v. Union of India, (Delhi)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2804923