A SSB officer, a single mother with a daughter in class 9, challenged her transfer to Pithoragarh. The court noted limited scope for interfering with transfers but directed postponement of the posting till 31.03.2025 on an undertaking to join by 02.04.2025, expressly not treating it as precedent. Petition disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~63
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 03.12.2024
versus
SASHASTRA SEEMA BAL AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr.Rakesh Kumar, CGSC, Mr.Sunil, Adv with SI Shrabanta Sarkar.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral)
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 16557/2024 Page 1 of 4
Digitally Signed By:SUNIL Signing Da te:1 0.12.2024 19:29:21
a single mother of a daughter who is currently studying in the 9th standard at the Navy Children School, Chanakya Puri, New Delhi. By the Transfer Order dated 25.10.2024, the respondent no.1 has transferred her to 55 Bn, Pithoragarh (Nepal Border). The petitioner made a representation against the said transfer, however, the same has been rejected by the Competent Authority vide the Impugned Order dated 27.11.2024. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court.
“1. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer only to an extension of the tenure till the time the daughter of the petitioner who is studying in class 9th completes her academic year which would end sometime in March, 2025. He submits that the petitioner will not claim any equity or right if such an extension is granted. She would also not claim any right to the General Pool Residential Accommodation (GPRA) because of such extension.”
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 16557/2024 Page 2 of 4 By:SUNIL Signing Da te:1 0.12.2024 19:29:21
with only in exceptional circumstances. In the present case, though it cannot be denied that the petitioner has stayed in Delhi for more than nine years, it is also her case that there are other officers who have been posted in Delhi for a longer period. She has given details of those officers in the petition. It is also not disputed that she is a single mother and her daughter is presently studying in 9th standard. Uprooting the daughter in the middle of the academic year would cause immense prejudice to her study.
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 16557/2024 Page 3 of 4
Digitally Signed By:SUNIL Signing Da te:1 0.12.2024 19:29:21
representation that may be made by the petitioner.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
GIRISH KATHPALIA, J
DECEMBER 3, 2024/Arya/DG
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 16557/2024 Page By:SUNIL Signing Da te:1 0.12.2024 19:29:21
4 of 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a single mother's transfer mid-academic-year could be postponed so her daughter could complete class 9 in Delhi?
DR VINOD KUMARI
SASHASTRA SEEMA BAL
ANR.
Navin Chawla
Girish Kathpalia
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
