A Bench of the Gauhati High Court has directed reconsideration of a joint posting request made by an Indian Army officer, in light of the special needs of his autistic child. The petition was filed by a Major in the Army, whose four-year-old son has been diagnosed with Moderate Autism Spectrum Disorder and assessed as having 80% disability, necessitating continuous and specialized medical treatment and therapy. His spouse, a Lieutenant Colonel also serving in the Army, was already posted at Guwahati, while he had been transferred from 30 Assam Battalion NCC, Guwahati to Mech Infantry, Jaisalmer. The couple had sought joint posting at a station equipped with adequate medical and educational facilities for their son. While the wife’s posting request had been accepted, the petitioner’s request was denied citing “policy constraints.”
The Court examined the relevant policy governing postings of officers with differently-abled dependents. It noted that while the policy requires posting officers “near appropriate medical facilities,” it does not confer a right to joint postings for both parents, especially where administrative exigency requires separate postings. The Court observed that in ordinary circumstances, it would refrain from interfering with such posting orders unless there is a statutory violation, mala fide intent, or manifest arbitrariness. Nevertheless, it emphasized the special situation presented by the child’s lifelong condition: an autistic child’s treatment and welfare often demand consistent caregiving and parental involvement; thus, having both parents close together could significantly benefit the child’s rehabilitation and overall well-being.
Quoting from the decision, the Court reasoned that the legal right at stake is not one of the parents to choose their posting arbitrarily, but rather the child’s right to have caregiver parents nearby for necessary support and therapy. Accepting that the standard posting policy does not guarantee joint posting, the Court nonetheless concluded that given the child’s disability and the corresponding need for ongoing care by both parents, the petitioner’s representation “deserves reconsideration.” In view of this, the Court directed the respondent authorities to reconsider the petitioner’s request for a joint posting at a location with suitable medical and educational facilities, balancing the child’s interest with administrative exigencies.
As a result, the writ petition filed by the petitioner—Major Niklesh Kumar Lohani v. Union of India & Ors.—was disposed of, with the order to reconsider the joint posting request in view of the child’s right to care and rehabilitation.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.