The Punjab and Haryana High Court has struck down Haryana’s blanket restriction on foreign travel by government employees, holding that the measure was arbitrary, disproportionate and inconsistent with constitutional rights.
The court set aside instructions issued by the Haryana government on 10 June, 2026. The order had barred government employees, along with staff of boards, corporations and public authorities, from travelling abroad for official or personal purposes until September 2026. Medical emergencies were the only exception.
The ruling came in a case filed by a nursing officer at PGIMS Rohtak, who wanted to travel to Australia to appear for an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). She had received approval to apply for an Australian visa in January 2026 and obtained the visa in May.
Her request for earned leave was not processed because of the government’s travel restrictions. She subsequently challenged the instructions before the High Court.
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, who heard the matter, held that the government could not impose a blanket restriction on overseas travel simply because a person was a government employee.
The court noted that the right to travel abroad forms part of the right to life and personal liberty protected under Article 21 of the Constitution. Any restriction must, therefore, meet standards of fairness, reasonableness and proportionality.
The government had defended the measure as a temporary austerity step amid economic pressures linked to the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the West Asian crisis. It argued that global disruptions had affected fuel supplies, supply chains and other essential resources.
The court, however, found no clear connection between these objectives and a blanket ban on foreign travel. It also pointed out that the instructions did not differentiate between employees based on their roles, purpose of travel or individual circumstances.
The judgment further noted that the restrictions could prevent employees from pursuing professional examinations, education and career-development opportunities overseas.
The High Court directed the authorities to permit the petitioner to travel to Australia for her examination. The ruling reinforces that executive measures affecting government employees must remain within constitutional limits and cannot impose sweeping restrictions without a proportionate justification.
