• Verdict authored by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar notes solid grounds needed if wedlock policy is to be ignored
• Bench sets aside Punjab service tribunal order; authorities directed to reconsider petitioner’s request for transfer within fortnight

ISLAMABAD: The Supr­eme Court has ruled that a government employee may not have a vested right to transfer to a particular station, but spouses covered under the wedlock policy have a legitimate expectation to be considered for joint postings unless compelling public interest dictates otherwise.

A division bench, headed by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and also comprising Justice Musarrat Hilali, gave its ruling on an appeal filed by Naheeda Aziz against the Jan 17, 2023 decision of the Punjab Service Tribunal, that had rejected her transfer request.

While citing federal and provincial governments’ wedlock policies, Justice Mazhar noted that such policies mitigate and alleviate the socio-economic problems and hardships faced by husbands and wives in government service due to postings at different duty stations.

The SC verdict, authored by Justice Mazhar, set aside the rejection of the petitioner’s transfer request under the wedlock policy, with a direction to the relevant authorities to reconsider her application within 15 days.

The 16-page judgement emphasised that beneficial policies aimed at keeping married couples together must not be frustrated on technical grounds.

The court ordered the office to send copies of the verdict to the Punjab chief minister, chief secretary and advocate general.

According to the judgement, the Punjab government’s wedlock policy, rooted in the constitutional protection of marriage and family under Article 35, carries binding force and cannot be ignored on the basis of rigid service rules.

The petitioner had been appointed as Assistant (BPS-14) in the Board of Revenue and posted in Lahore, while her husband, also serving in the Revenue Department, was posted in Faisalabad as a clerk (BPS-11).

Keeping in view the wedlock policy, the petitioner sought her transfer from Lahore to Faisalabad, but her request was denied. She then approached the Punjab Service Tribunal, which dismissed her appeal.

Allowing the appeal, Justice Mazhar observed that any refusal of such a request must be based on concrete and tangible grounds rather than the misuse or abuse of authority to circumvent the law and policy, causing distress and mental agony to an employee seeking transfer under the wedlock policy — a beneficial scheme intended to remedy marital inconveniences and protect the sanctity of home and family.

“Unless there are insurmountable hurdles, requests by husband and wife to be posted at one station are not only required to be considered with compassion and kindness but also implemented judiciously,” the SC held.

The judgement stressed that once a competent authority frames a wedlock policy, it is duty-bound to implement and adhere to it so that all persons covered under the policy may benefit. Its implementation, the court said, cannot be left to the whims and discretion of the competent authority on a pick-and-choose basis. Instead, such policies must be applied uniformly and without discrimination.

The court further observed that the wedlock policy is deeply rooted in Article 35 of the Constitution, which obliges the state to protect marriage, the family, the mother and the child. Keeping married couples together at the same station, it said, prevents the involuntary separation of spouses due to different work locations.

According to the verdict, the policy particularly addresses the hardships faced by working women who are compelled to manage childcare and professional responsibilities alone while living away from their spouses.

Justice Mazhar emphasised that the wedlock policy creates a legitimate expectation for married civil servants that they will be accommodated rather than subjected to arbitrary deviations from policy without justification. Any ambiguity, the judgement added, should be resolved in favour of the intended beneficiaries.

The SC also suggested that even where no vacancy exists at the spouse’s station, meaningful efforts should still be made to accommodate the couple at the same posting through temporary transfer, permanent transfer, absorption, or deputation in the same or another federal or provincial government department. It observed that authorities should honour the spirit of the wedlock policy instead of frustrating it on irrational pretexts or rejecting requests on the excuse that no post is available without making sincere efforts to accommodate the applicants.

Published in Dawn, May 27th, 2026