CAPF Officers Can't Seek Posting Based On Parents' Illness; Authorities Expected To Be Alive To Hardships: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has said that the policy of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) at present does not contain a provision which could constitute a basis for an officer to choose a place of posting on the grounds that the parents are unwell.

A division bench comprising Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla has asked the authorities to be alive to the difficulties faced by such officers.

It said that the CAPF policy only contains a provision that if the spouse or the child of an officer is unwell, that could constitute a basis for the officer to choose a place of posting.

“No such dispensation is provided in the case of parents of an officer. Though this may be a hard provision, it is understandable to the extent that, with the ascendancy in the careers of the officers, parents would also get older, and it is possible that if officers were permitted to choose a place of posting based on the condition of their parents, it would become very difficult to post officers appropriately,” the Court said.

“Nonetheless, we do expect that the respondents would be alive to the difficulties that the officers face in such situations,” it added.

The Bench was dealing with a plea filed by an officer seeking change in the place of his posting on the grounds that he was the sole caregiver of his father aged 90 years old. It was his case that the place at which he was posted did not have sufficient hospital facilities to take care of his father.

The Court disposed of the plea with the consent of the parties while directing the authorities to consider the officer's request for posting him at a place where there are sufficient facilities to treat his father, including the possibility to post him at Rampur- a place of his choice.

“If it is not possible to accede to the said request, a suitable communication to that effect would be addressed to the petitioner within a period of one week from today, specifically setting out the reasons why it is not possible to do so,” the Court said.

“In that event, the petitioner would comply with the impugned order of transfer,” it added.

Title: DR. VIVEK KUMAR MATHUR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1178

Click here to read order