The Delhi High Court has issued notice to the central government (Ministry of Defence) on a plea by a lady Army officer challenging her transfer from Bathinda to Ranikhet, even before the completion of her two-year tenure under the spouse posting policy. The court directed that her transfer be put on hold if another officer has not already been posted in her place at Bathinda.
Issuing notice and posting the matter for further consideration on November 27, a Bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla ordered that, “In the event that there has been no other officer posted in place of the petitioner at Bathinda, there shall be a stay of operation of the transfer of the petitioner and the petitioner shall be permitted to continue at Bathinda.”
The order was passed on Tuesday — October 28, 2025.
However, the Bench also granted the government liberty to place on record any material which, according to it, could satisfy the court that the transfer of the petitioner from Bathinda to Ranikhet was bona fide and in accordance with the applicable instructions.
“In case there is sufficient material to justify the transfer of the petitioner, the respondents (authorities) would also be at liberty to move an application in these proceedings to seek modification or vacation of the order passed today,” said the High Court.
The matter relates to the petitioner, Lt. Col. Manali Shrivastava, who was posted at Bathinda by way of spouse posting under the Spouse Coordinated Posting (SCP) policy. The SCP mandates that a spouse posting would ordinarily be for a period of 24 months, which, owing to unavoidable organisational constraints, could be curtailed to 18 months. However, Clause 4(e) states: “SCP is subject to continued satisfactory performance. In case of unsatisfactory performance, based upon case taken up by the Unit/Fmn, the SCP can be curtailed and offr(s) posted out.”
The High Court further directed that the relevant file containing the deliberations preceding the transfer of the petitioner be kept ready for the Court’s perusal.
Lt. Col. Manali Shrivastava has alleged that the transfer is mala fide, made at the instance of the Commanding Officer, who harbours bias against her.
Expecting magnanimity on the part of the Army authorities, the Court said it was of the opinion that it would have been in the “fitness of things for the respondents to come forth and graciously allow” the petitioner to complete her tenure in Bathinda or at least the period of 18 months. However, the Court noted that the Army authorities were not willing to make any such statement.
Referring to the reliance placed by the counsel appearing for the government on Clause 4(e) of the SCP and the communication preceding the transfer, as well as the allegation of mala fides against her, the court said it was not certain as to the extent to which this communication could form the basis for transferring the petitioner.
Having said this, the court noted that even otherwise, the transfer of an officer on spouse coordinated posting before the tenure expires is envisaged in Clause 4(e) only in the case of unsatisfactory performance “based upon case taken up by the Unit/Fmn.” The court observed that the government counsel could not enlighten it on the exact import of the expression “based upon case taken up by the Unit/Fmn.”
Referring to Clause 4(c) of the SCP, which provides that curtailment of the tenure of a spouse coordinated posting below 18 months is permissible only in the case of unavoidable organisational constraints, the court noted that, “The order of transfer of the petitioner to Ranikhet does not refer to any such unavoidable organisational constraints. In fact, the order is completely non-speaking and merely transfers the petitioner even before the tenure of 18 months is over,” the order stated.