CWP-27369-2026 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

113

CWP-27369-2026 (O&M)

Date of decision: 27.08.2026

Sheetal Rani

....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present:Mr. Brijender Kaushik, Advocate

with Mr. Sandeep Kr. Bhardwaj, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Akshit Pathania, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Aditya Gautam, Advocate

for respondents No.3 and 4.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral)

1. Prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of

the Constitution of India is for issuance of a writ in the nature of

certiorari for quashing the Instructions/Guidelines dated 10.06.2026

(Annexure P-7) issued by respondent No.1/State of Haryana, insofar as

they impose a blanket restriction/prohibition upon foreign travel by

government employees. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought,

directing the respondents to grant Earned Leave to the petitioner from

03.09.2026 to 04.10.2026 for travelling to Australia, in terms of the

approval dated 15.01.2026 (Annexure P-1) granted by respondent No.4.

CWP-27369-2026 2

CONTENTIONS

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that

the petitioner joined as a Nursing Officer with respondent No.3-PGIMS,

Rohtak on 23.02.2021. With the objective of gaining professional

experience and obtaining higher qualification, she applied for the

Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) conducted by the

Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency and National Boards.

Her foreign visit was initially approved by respondent No.4 vide order

dated 15.01.2026 (Annexure P-1), granting her a No Objection

Certificate to apply for a Visa. Subsequently, she deposited the

prescribed fee on 07.02.2026 (Annexure P-2), received confirmation of

her registration on 04.08.2026 (Annexure P-3), and was granted an

Australian Visitor (Subclass 600) Visa on 29.05.2026, valid from

29.05.2026 to 29.05.2031, as is evident from Annexure P-4. Her

application to attend the course and appear in the examination scheduled

for 29.09.2026 was approved vide communication dated 04.08.2026.

Pursuant thereto, she submitted her application dated 18.08.2026 for

Earned Leave (Annexures P-5 and P-6). However, respondent No.2

refused to entertain her application in view of the Government

Instructions/Guidelines dated 10.06.2026 (Annexure P-7) which

prohibits Government servants and employees of Boards, Corporations

and public authorities from traveling abroad, for official or personal

reasons, up to September, 2026, except if such travel is necessitated for

medical reasons.

CWP-27369-2026 3

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argues

that the impugned Government Instructions (Annexure P-7) are

unconstitutional, arbitrary and disproportionate. It is submitted that the

right to travel abroad is a recognized facet of the fundamental right to

life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution

of India. In support of this argument, reliance has been placed upon the

judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satwant Singh

Sawhney v. D. Ramarathnam, AIR 1967 SC 1836 and Maneka Gandhi

v. Union of India, (1978) 1 SCC 248. It is further contended that this

right cannot be curtailed except by a procedure established by law

which is fair, just and reasonable. The impugned Instructions (Annexure

P-7) are merely executive/administrative in nature, and thus, cannot by

themselves constitute the 'procedure established by law' under Article 21

of the Constitution of India, particularly in the absence of a valid

legislative or statutory foundation authorizing such blanket deprivation

of a fundamental right.

4. It is further submitted that the impugned Instructions

(Annexure P-7) fail the tests of fairness, reasonableness and non-

arbitrariness, as they indiscriminately apply to all government

employees, irrespective of their individual circumstances, destination,

purpose of travel, duration of absence or nature of duties. Learned

counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that although the State

may, in an appropriate case and in accordance with law, regulate the

foreign travel by its employees, such regulation cannot take the form of

CWP-27369-2026 4

an indiscriminate and blanket prohibition having no reasonable nexus

with the object sought to be achieved. According to learned counsel for

the petitioner, any restriction affecting the petitioner's personal liberty

must satisfy the requirements of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution

of India and must be fair, just, reasonable and non-arbitrary.

5. Per contra, learned State counsel, while reiterating the

contents of the impugned Instructions/Guidelines (Annexure P-7),

submitted that the same were issued in view of the Russia-Ukraine

conflict and the West Asian crisis, which have created a serious impact

on the global supply chain, particularly in relation to fuel and other

essential resources. He has further submitted that the impugned

Instructions (Annexure P-7) were issued as an austerity measure in the

larger public interest to conserve resources and reduce expenditure. It is

argued that the restrictions are temporary in nature and the Government

is entitled to take such measures in the larger public interest, especially

in the current global context.

OBSERVATION AND ANALYSIS

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record with their able assistance.

7. The primary question that arises for consideration of this

Court is whether the impugned Government Instructions/Guidelines

dated 10.06.2026 (Annexure P-7), insofar as they impose a blanket

prohibition on foreign travel by government employees, are

constitutionally valid.

CWP-27369-2026 5

8. In today’s globalized world, the right to travel abroad

cannot be restricted as a matter of mere administrative privilege. The

Hon'ble Supreme Court, in a catena of judgments, has authoritatively

held that the right to travel abroad is an integral part of the right to life

and personal liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

In Satwant Singh Sawhney (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court had

held that the government cannot deny a passport to its citizen, without

the procedure established by law, as it would effectively deprive him of

his fundamental right to travel abroad. This principle was subsequently

authoritatively explained in the landmark judgment of Maneka Gandhi

(supra), wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the right to go

abroad is a part of 'personal liberty' under Article 21 of the Constitution

of India and any law or procedure that deprives a person of this right

must be 'right, just and fair' and not 'arbitrary, fanciful or oppressive'.

This principle was reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satish

Chandra Verma vs. Union of India and others 2019 (2) SCT 741,

wherein, the following was observed:

"5. The right to travel abroad is an important basic human

right for it nourishes independent and self- determining

creative character of the individual, not only by extending

his freedoms of action, but also by extending the scope of

his experience. The right also extends to private life;

marriage, family and friendship are humanities which can

be rarely affected through refusal of freedom to go abroad

and clearly show that this freedom is a genuine human

right. (See Mrs. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and

Another (1978) 1 SCC 248). In the said judgement, there

is a reference to the words of Justice Douglas in Kent v.

Dulles [1958] 357 US 116 which are as follows:

CWP-27369-2026 6

"Freedom to go abroad has much social value and

represents the basic human right of great

significance."

9. In the present case, the impugned Instructions/Guidelines

dated 10.06.2026 (Annexure P-7), issued by the Human Resource

Department, Government of Haryana, impose a complete ban on foreign

travel upon its employees. The relevant extract of the

Instructions/Guidelines dated 10.06.2026 (Annexure P-7), reads as

under:-

“No. 62/47/2026-6HR-1

Haryana Government

Chief Secretary Organisation

Human Resource Department

(Human Resource -I Branch)

Dated, Chandigarh, the 10 June, 2026

To,

1. All the Administrative Secretaries to

Government, Haryana.

2. All the Heads of Departments of Haryana.

3. All the Managing Directors/Chief

Administrators of Boards/Corporations in

Haryana.

4. All the Divisional Commissioners of the

State of Haryana.

5. All the Deputy Commissioners of the State

of Haryana.

6. The Registrars of all the Universities in the

State of Haryana.

Subject: Necessary guidelines regarding saving fuel,

energy conservation and judicious use of other resources.

Sir/Madam,

I am directed to invite your attention to the subject cited

above and to say that after the Covid pandemic, the

CWP-27369-2026 7

Russia-Ukraine conflict and the ongoing West Asian crisis,

have created a serious impact on the global supply chain,

especially in relation to fuel, precious metals, food items

and fertilizers. Due to this global crisis, fuel costs, import

dependence and economic pressure in India are increasing.

In the above circumstances, after due consideration, the

following decisions/advisories are issued:

I. Instructions/Advisories for Government Departments,

Boards, Corporations and Public Authorities

1. No approval shall be granted for foreign travel, either

official or personal, by Government servants and

employees of Boards/corporations/Local bodies, etc., upto

September 2026, except for medical treatment.

2. Efforts should be made for holding all meetings through

Video Conferencing. At least 50% of the meetings, at all

levels in Government, will be held through online mode.

Movement of Government employees should be minimized.

3. No gathering of public or officials shall be held unless

extremely necessary. Public expenditure on functions,

festivities, seminars, working lunches, dinners and

entertainment shall be avoided.

4. District Administration or Police Department will not

grant any permission for any gathering. rally, vehicle

procession, road show etc., for any purpose, till September

2026.

5. Industries Department should take up the matter with

industry organizations such as NASSCOM, CIL, FICCI,

etc., to encourage work from home, as per feasibility. They

are requested to have different time slots to avoid

congestion.

6. The number of vehicles in official convoys (VVIP's)

should be reduced by 50%, subject to security

considerations.

CWP-27369-2026 8

7. Attention should be given to fuel-saving bus services.

Frequency of public transport/buses should be increased.

Further, Finance Department will impose a cut of 20% on

POL. budget expenditure of all departments, till September

2026.

8. Finance Department will develop a portal for

monitoring savings in fuel expenditure in Government

organizations. Every Head of Department will upload a

certificate at the end of every month certifying at least 10%

reduction in vehicle usage of the department.

9. There shall be complete ban on purchase of non-EV

vehicles in Government and Boards/corporations/

Commissions, etc., till September 2026.

10. Charging stations/networks for electric vehicles should

be expanded on priority basis. Implementation of cycle

lanes and public bicycle sharing schemes in urban areas

should be considered.

11. Transport of bulk products such as cement, foodgrains

and fertilizers through rail freight should be considered.

Industries Department should take up the matter with

industry organizations such as NASSCOM, CII, FICCI, etc.

12. In Government buildings, the temperature of air-

conditioners should be maintained at 24-26°C.

Unnecessary lighting and decorative lighting should be

controlled. Office timings may be shifted by one hour to

utilize day lighting.

13. Tourism Department will undertake a domestic tourism

promotion campaign focusing on safe. religious, wellness

and rural tourism. Local destinations will be publicized for

destination weddings. Government of India will be

requested to create a portal for self-declaration.

recognition and encouragement in this regard.

14. Foreign Cooperation Department will request Indian

Diaspora Associations to encourage their members to

spend holidays in India.

CWP-27369-2026 9

15. MSMEs (Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises) and

SHGs (Self Help Groups) should be considered for on

boarding on platforms such as ONDC, Amazon Karigar

and Flipkart Samarth. Import-substitution items should be

identified and local production should be encouraged.

Industries Department should make efforts in this regard.

16. Health Department will launch public awareness

campaigns regarding the health benefits of low- oil food.

17. Oil consumption in schools, hospitals and Government

canteens should be reviewed and reduction in its use

should be considered. Health Department will take steps

for training ASHA workers, SHGs and women's groups

regarding reduced use of oil in meals.

18. Agriculture Department will make efforts to increase

production of oilseeds.

19. Farmers should be provided training in Natural

Farming, Zero Budget Farming and Bio-inputs. Awareness

campaigns should be launched regarding balanced use of

fertilizers and soil health. Bio-input Resource Centres

should be established through FPOs and cooperative

societies. Non-Agricultural use and smuggling of fertilizers

should be controlled.

20. District Administration will seek cooperation of

religious and social leaders and make an appeal to the

public regarding reduction/deferment of gold purchases

and reuse of old ornaments.

21. Usage of PNG and LPG should be managed better.

Duplicate LPG connections should be removed and small

cylinders should be promoted. Any stalled PNG-related

projects should be expedited.

22. Municipal solid waste should be utilized for energy or

Compressed Bio Gas generation and related projects

should be expedited. Net metering permissions should be

expedited. Power Department should run campaigns for

CWP-27369-2026 10

saving electricity and promote renewable energy. 23.

Approvals for mining, solar and power projects should be

expedited.

24. Expenditure on public advertisements will be

minimized, DIPR and other Government agencies and

Public Funded Organisations will ensure that expenditure

on banners, posters and flex-boards is minimized. No

newspaper advertisement larger than one-fourth page shall

be published.

25. Public awareness campaigns under the theme "Mera

Bharat, Mera Yogdan" should be conducted. DIPR should

run social media awareness campaigns highlighting the

importance of public contribution in this regard.”

10. A perusal of the impugned Instructions (Annexure P-7)

makes it evident that a blanket prohibition with respect to foreign travel

has been mechanically applied to all government employees.

Furthermore, the said Instructions do not provide any scope of

accommodation in consideration of individual circumstances, nature of

duties, designation of the employee or purpose of travel.

11. At the outset, it must be observed that the impugned

Instructions (Annexure P-7) are purely executive in nature. They do not

derive their authority from any legislative enactment. Further still, even

assuming, for the sake of argument, the Government has the power to

regulate foreign travel of its employees, the restriction imposed must

satisfy the rigorous standards of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of

India i.e. the procedure adopted to accomplish the said goal must be fair,

reasonable, non-arbitrary and proportionate. A two-Judge bench of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Kerala vs. M. Vijayakumar 2026

CWP-27369-2026 11

INSC 352, while referring to State of Punjab and others vs. Davinder

Singh and others (2025) 1 SCC 1 and Ajay Hasia and others vs.

Khalid Mujib Sehravardi and others (1981) 1 SCC 722, speaking

through Justice Manoj Mishra, has opined as follows:

“22. Article 14 of the Constitution forbids class legislation

but permits reasonable classification which must satisfy

twin tests: (1) that the classification must be founded on

an intelligible differentia which distinguishes those that

are grouped together from others, and (2) that differentia

must have rational nexus with the object sought to be

achieved by the Act - The differentia which is the basis of

the classification and the object of the Act are distinct

things and what is necessary is that there must be a nexus

between the two.

(13)

Legislative and executive action may

accordingly be sustained if it satisfies the twin tests of

reasonable classification and the rational principle

correlated to the object sought to be achieved. The burden

of proof lies on the State to affirmatively establish that

these twin tests have been satisfied. The State must

therefore not only establish the rational principle on which

classification is founded but correlate it to the objects

sought to be achieved

(14)

. Besides, equality is a dynamic

concept with many aspects and dimensions, and it cannot

be cribbed, cabined and confined within traditional and

doctrinaire limits. From a positivistic point of view,

equality is antithetic to arbitrariness. In fact, equality and

arbitrariness are sworn enemies; one belongs to the rule of

law in a republic while the other, to the whim and caprice

of an absolute monarch. Where an act is arbitrary, it is

implicit in it that it is unequal both according to political

logic and constitutional law and is therefore violative of

Article 14, and if it affects any matter relating to public

employment, it is also violative of Article 16. Articles 14

and 16 strike at arbitrariness in State action and ensure

fairness and equality of treatment. They require that State

action must be based on valid relevant principles

applicable alike to all similar situate and it must not be

CWP-27369-2026 12

guided by any extraneous or irrelevant considerations

because that would be denial of equality

xxx xxx xxx

24. In State of Punjab & Ors. v. Davinder Singh & Ors,

(2025) 1 SCC 1, Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, C.J. (as His

Lordship then was), while explaining the contours of

Article 14, wrote:

“85. The Constitution permits valid classification if

two conditions are fulfilled. First, there must be an

intelligible differentia which distinguishes persons

grouped together from others left out of the group.

The phrase "intelligible differentia" means difference

capable of being understood. The difference is

capable of being understood when there is a

yardstick to differentiate the class included and

others excluded from the group. In the absence of the

yardstick, the differentiation would be without a

basis and hence, unreasonable. The basis of

classification must be deducible from the provisions

of the statute; surrounding circumstances or matters

of common knowledge. In making the classification,

the State is free to recognize degrees of harm.

Though the classification need not be mathematical

in precision, there must be some difference between

the persons grouped and the persons left out, and

the difference must be real and pertinent. The

classification is unreasonable if there is little or no

difference. Second, the differentia must have a

rational relation to the object sought to be achieved

by the law, that is, the basis of classification must

have a nexus with the object of the classification.””

(Emphasis Supplied)

12. A blanket prohibition on an entire class of citizens merely

because they are in government service is manifestly arbitrary. The State

has failed to demonstrate any rational nexus between the objective

sought to be achieved by the impugned Instructions (Annexure P-7) i.e.,

addressing the impact of the global crisis on fuel and resources, and the

CWP-27369-2026 13

complete prohibition imposed on private foreign travel. Further still,

preventing a Nursing Officer from travelling to Australia for a

professional examination does not only trample upon her right to travel

abroad but is also thwarting her from receiving higher education. The

right to education is a fundamental right traceable to Part III of the

Constitution of India and as such, linked to the right to life and personal

liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

12.1. A Two Judge bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Miss.

Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka 1992 INSC 186 while speaking

through Justice Kuldip Singh, observed as under:

“12. "Right to life" is the compendious expression for all

those rights which the Courts must enforce because they

are basic to the dignified enjoyment of life. It extends to the

full range of conduct which the individual is free to pursue.

The right to education flows directly from right to life. The

right to life under Article 21 and the dignity of an

individual cannot be assured unless it is accompanied by

the right to education. The State Government is under an

obligation to make endeavour to Provide educational

facilities at all levels to its citizens.

13. The fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of

the Constitution of India including the right to freedom of

speech and expression and other rights under Article 19

cannot be appreciated and fully enjoyed unless a citizen is

educated and is conscious of his individualistic dignity.

14. The "right to education", therefore, is concomitant to

the fundamental rights enshrined under Part III of the

Constitution. The State is under a constitutional-mandate

to provide educational institutions at all levels for the

benefit of the citizens. The educational institutions must

function to the best advantage of the citizens. Opportunity

CWP-27369-2026 14

to acquire education cannot be confined to the richer

section of the society. Increasing demand for medical

education has led to the opening of large number of

medical colleges by private persons, groups and trusts with

the permission and recognition of State Governments. The

Karnataka State has permitted the opening of several new

medical colleges under various private bodies and

organisations. These institutions are charging capitation

fee as a consideration for admission. Capitation fee is

nothing but a price for selling education. The concept of

"teaching shops" is contrary to the constitutional scheme,

and is wholly abhorrent to the Indian culture and heritage.

As back as December, 1980 the Indian Medical Association

in its 56th All India Medical Conference held at Cuttack on

December 28-30, 1980 passed the following resolutions:

"The 56th All India Medical Conference views with

great concern the attitude of State Governments

particularly the State Government of Karnataka in

permitting the opening of new Medical Colleges

under various bodies and organisations in utter

disregard to the recommendations of Medical

Council of India and urges upon the authorities and

the Government of Karnataka not to permit the

opening of any new medical college, by private

bodies.

It further condemns the policy of admission on the

basis of capitation fees. This commercialisation of

medial education endangers the lowering of

standards of medical education and encourages bad

practice."”

12.2. Reliance in this regard may also be placed on another

judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Avinash Mehrotra

v. Union of India 2009 (6) SCC 398, which observed that, “right to

education attaches to the individual as an inalienable human right.”

Additionally, it is unclear as to how denial of foreign travel to a Nursing

Officer seeking to upskill would assist in the larger aim of fuel

CWP-27369-2026 15

conservation. No plausible explanation is forthcoming on behalf of the

respondents in this regard. As such, this Court cannot validate the

approach adopted by the Government in imposing a blanket restriction

by means of the impugned Instructions (Annexure P-7), the same being

grossly disproportionate to its alleged objective. The factual matrix of

the present case is illustrative of a sledgehammer being used to crack a

nut, which is impermissible in our constitutional jurisprudence.

CONCLUSION

13. In view of the discussion above, the present petition is

disposed of in the following manner:

(i) The impugned Instructions/Guidelines dated

10.06.2026 (Annexure P-7) are set-aside to the extent that

it imposes a complete ban on Government employees to

travel abroad.

(ii) Respondent No.4/competent authority is directed to

pass appropriate orders, on or before 31.08.2026,

granting permission to the petitioner to travel abroad.

The petitioner shall rejoin service after the expiry of the

sanctioned leave period.

14. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand

disposed of.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)

JUDGE

27.08.2026

yakub

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

Whether reportable: Yes/No