Policy on Posting Spouses Together Not Enforceable; Transfer Is an Incident of Service: Rajasthan High Court

The petitioner challenged an order of 10.07.2026 transferring him from Alwar to Bharatpur (para 1). He alleged it was made to accommodate respondent No. 4, who had been proposed for his post in a 2021 transfer that the Rajasthan Civil Service Appellate Tribunal stayed (paras 2-3). He relied on the respondents' policy of posting husband and wife at the same place, his wife also being in service, and said the Secretary (Administration) was not competent to transfer him (para 4). JVVNL replied that the Chief Managing Director had approved the order, that he had served at Alwar since 2011, that the spouse policy is directory, and that the new posting was hardly 10 kilometres from his wife's (paras 5-6).

Transfer is an incident of service: no employee can claim a particular place of posting for all time, and the employer may post employees as administrative exigency requires (para 10). Such an order can be challenged only if it is shown to be actuated by malice or issued against the prevailing statutory rules and policies (para 10). The Court found no substance in the claim that the exercise was meant to accommodate respondent No. 4: the earlier order of 20.09.2021 lost its effect once the petitioner was allowed to continue under the Tribunal's orders, and the impugned order was passed later on account of administrative exigency (para 10). Guidelines on posting husband and wife at the same or the nearest place are internal directives to the employer's own officers, not backed by any statutory rule, and are not enforceable; they confer no right to remain at one place indefinitely (para 11). The petitioner had been posted at Alwar since April 2011 (para 12). On competence, the Secretary (Administration) had passed the order under the instructions of JVVNL's Chief Managing Director (para 12). The order does not discuss S.K. Nausad Rahaman v. Union of India, which the petitioner cited (para 8).