Lt. Col. M.B. Roshini vs. Union Of India And Ors.

2021:DHC:1002-DB
22
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 2942/2021 & CM APPLs. 8862-8863/2021

LT. COL. M.B. ROSHINI ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Advocate with
Mr. Nikunj Arora, Advocate.
versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Advocate with
Mr. Sahaj Garg, GP with Lt. Col.
Mr. Sandeep Singh, Advocate.

th
% Date of Decision: 18 March, 2021


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON

J U D G M E N T


MANMOHAN, J (Oral):

1. Present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-

“a. Issue a Writ of Certiorari for quashing of the order dated
20.01.2021 to the extent whereby the Petitioner has been posted
out to 151 Base Hospital, Guwahati, Assam as GD Matron and
of the signal dated 24.02.2021 whereby the request of the
Petitioner, regarding extension of tenure on the grounds of
children's education, submitted by the Petitioner has been
rejected; and

b. Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to allow
the Petitioner to continue at the current place of posting by
deferring the order dated 20.01.2021 for a period of 01
year, i.e. till the time the Petitioner's daughter completes her
W.P.(C) 2942/2021 Page 1 of 4

2021:DHC:1002-DB
XII class in view of the posting policy issued by the Respondents
on 19.02.2014 and 25.04.2018 and also keeping in mind the
facts and circumstances of the Petitioner; and

c. Pass any such orders as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit
in the light of above mentioned facts and circumstances of the
case.”

2. On the first date of hearing, Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, learned counsel for
respondents had pointed out that the petitioner had been repeatedly seeking
th
and getting extension of tenure in Delhi since 05 September, 2017.

3. However, on a direction of this Court, Mr. Bhardwaj had stated that,
without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respondents, a superior
officer would speak to the petitioner in a bid to amicably resolve the matter.
th
4. On 04 March, 2021, this Court was informed by Mr. Bhardwaj that
as petitioner’s daughter was going to joint Class XII in April, 2021, the
petitioner would be allowed to retain her present official accommodation in
th
Delhi till 30 April, 2022. He was directed by this Court to obtain
instructions as to whether the leave that the petitioner was entitled in the
years 2021 and 2022 would be granted in case the petitioner joins her duty at
Guwahati.
th
5. Today, Mr. Bhardwaj has handed over a copy of the letter dated 17
March, 2021 written by Col.. Dir MNS (Adm). The same is taken on record.
The said letter reads as under:-
“1. Ref Hon’ble Court Order on WP No 2942 of 2021 filed by
Lt Col MB Roshini Vs UOI and Others dated 16 Mar 2021.
2. The details of leave which may be availed by the a/m
petitioner consequent to her exercising the option of retaining
the accommodation on academic grounds of her daughter while
proceeding on permanent posting to 151 BH are as follows:-

W.P.(C) 2942/2021 Page 2 of 4

W.P.(C) 2942/2021 Page 3 of 4

2021:DHC:1002-DB
However, this shall not be construed as a blanket sanction for
the grant of leave.
5. It is further submitted that as mentioned in Leave Rules for
Armed Forces 2018, leave cannot be claimed as a right, its
grant is always subject to exigencies of service.
6. Whereas all efforts will be taken to ensure the grant of a/m
leave to the petitioner however, leave is liable to be denied by
the competent authority if the circumstances at the time of
granting leave are not favorable.
7. The aforementioned facts may be brought before the notice
of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi through the CGSC detailed
to defend the case on the Next Date of Hearing.
8. This issues with the approval of Offg DGMC (Army).

Sd/-
(Sudharmma Devi P)
Col Dir MNS (Adm)”

3. This Court has no doubt that the Commandant of the Guwahati Unit,
where the petitioner is to join, shall take a liberal view as and when
petitioner applies for leave.
4. In the event, the petitioner is of the view that the petitioner has been
denied leave unreasonably, it shall open to her to mention the present matter.
It is clarified that this order has been made in the special facts of the present
case and shall not be treated as precedent.
5. With the aforesaid liberty, the present writ petition and applications
stand disposed of.

MANMOHAN, J

ASHA MENON, J
MARCH 18, 2021/ js
W.P.(C) 2942/2021 Page 4 of 4