Serial No. 07 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C) No. 199 of 2026 Date of Decision: 15.05.2026 Shri Joginder Singh, (M/s 3101763 Rfn (NA) S/o (L) Jagir Singh, presently posted at Assam Rifles Training Centre and School Diphu, Karbi Anglong, Assam. …. Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The Union of India represented by The Commandant of Assam Rifle, IRG Centre, Shillong, Meghalaya-793011. 2. The Director General of Assam Rifles, Shillong, Meghalaya 3. The HQ, IGAR (S/E/Headquarter 10/21/27 Set AR. 4. The Lt. Col. SO2 Shillong, Meghalaya Khasi Hills District. … Respondent(s) Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. Yobin, Adv. with Ms. S. Mitkong, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Dr. N. Mozika, DSGI with Ms. C. Jala, Adv. 2026:MLHC:468 __________________________________________________________ i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc: ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No in press: JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) 1. The instructions dated 14.05.2026 have been received and the same is produced before this Court. The instructions reflect as follows: - “2. Posting of No M/3101763 Rifleman (Nursing Assistant) Joginder Singh was issued to ARTC&S on Compassionate Medical Ground for two years with move date of 20 Sep 2023 vide this Dte posting order No 1.17015/Adm-IV (Med Posting)/2023/247 dt 17 Aug 2023 (Annexure-1). Accordingly, the individual reported at ARTC&S on 07 Nov 2023. On completion of two years tenure with ARTC&S, his reversion order was issued to affiliated unit i.e. 8 AR located at Arunachal Pradesh vide this Dte posting order No 1.17015/Adm-IV (Med Posting)/2025/235 dt 24 Oct 2025 (Annexure - II). 3. It is pertinent to mention that as per Para 279 (d) of ROI 2024 the tenure of compassionate posting is two years which cannot be extended further.” 2. The writ petitioner it is noted had already approached this Court on an earlier occasion vide WP(C) No. 631 of 2025, wherein this Court by an order dated 09.12.2025, considering the hardships faced by the writ petitioner, while not setting aside the transfer order had directed 2026:MLHC:468 that the movement of the writ petitioner be affected from 31.03.2026. The Court also allowed the writ petitioner to retain his quarters, so that the examination of his child would not be disturbed. In this second round of litigation, the writ petitioner has again sought for stay of his transfer on another ground, that is of illness namely, locomotor disorder. 3. Mr. P. Yobin, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been transferred to Miao in Changlang District, Arunachal Pradesh, which he submits does not have any medical facilities, in case the petitioner faces any difficulties. He further submits that the area is a disturbed area, and as such the petitioner will be put to great hardships. He therefore prays that though the petitioner in not resisting transfer, the respondents may be directed to consider that he may be posted in a place where medical facilities are available. 4. Dr. N. Mozika, learned DSGI assisted by Ms. C. Jala, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that this Court by the order dated 09.12.2025, passed in WP(C) No. 631 of 2025, had not stayed the transfer order but had only kept the movement order in abeyance in consideration of the examination of the child of the writ petitioner. He further submits that in the second round of litigation, a new ground has been set out, which is untenable. He therefore, prays that the writ petition 2026:MLHC:468 be given no consideration, and the petitioner be directed to join to his new place of posting. The learned DSGI has further submitted that if the writ petitioner faces any difficulties in the new place of posting, he is always at liberty to alert the competent authorities, who shall take adequate steps to ensure his health. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the instructions, this Court reiterates the earlier order with regard to the non-interference with the transfer order, but however observes that if the writ petitioner faces any difficulties in the new place of posting, he is at liberty to alert the authorities, who shall take appropriate action in this regard, including considering re-posting in any other place. 6. Accordingly, as discussed and noted above, the writ petition is closed and disposed of. JUDGE Meghalaya 15.05.2026 “V. Lyndem-PS” 2026:MLHC:468 Digitally signed by VALENTINO LYNDEM Date: 2026.05.15 18:31:02 IST