Disposed¶20

Sgt Ankit Kumar through His Father Shri Narendra Chaudhary v. Union of India and Ors.

Delhi HC20 Aug 2025W.P.(C)/11941/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition disposed; service matter; Indian Air Force sergeant; transfer order dated 6 May 2025; withdrawal of movement order dated 21 July 2025; representation to be decided within four weeks after medical opinion; remedies reserved; Union of India; Delhi High Court; oral order 20.08.2025; bench C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla JJ.; no costs, no quantum.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of on the respondents' assurance: the movement order dated 21 July 2025 already stands withdrawn; respondents to treat the writ petition as a representation and take a view after obtaining an appropriate medical opinion regarding the petitioner within four weeks; decision to be communicated forthwith; petitioner's legal remedies reserved if still aggrieved. ¶20

Sgt Ankit Kumar through His Father Shri Narendra Chaudhary Vs Union of India and Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should treat the writ petition as a representation and take a decision thereon after obtaining an appropriate medical opinion regarding the petitioner, within four weeks.

¶17

Court's answer

The respondents are bound to their assurance to treat the writ petition as a representation and take a view thereon after obtaining an appropriate medical opinion regarding the petitioner within four weeks, and the decision as and when taken will be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

If the petitioner continues to remain aggrieved by the decision taken pursuant to the assurance, his remedies in law stand reserved.

¶19

Key takeaways

The writ petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms, without adjudicating the merits of the transfer order.ratio¶20
The next date of hearing fixed for 8 December 2025 stands cancelled.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla, JJ.), by oral order dated 20.08.2025, disposed of W.P.(C) 11941/2025 filed by Sgt Ankit Kumar (through his father) challenging a transfer order dated 6 May 2025. Noting the respondents' submission that the movement order dated 21 July 2025 following the transfer order had already been withdrawn, and their assurance to treat the writ petition as a representation and decide it after obtaining an appropriate medical opinion regarding the petitioner within four weeks, the Court bound the respondents to the assurance, directed that the decision be communicated forthwith, reserved the petitioner's remedies in law, and cancelled the hearing fixed for 8 December 2025. No statute or precedent was cited; the merits of the transfer order were not adjudicated.

¶1

$~94

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 11941/2025, CM APPL. 51310/2025

¶4

SGT ANKIT KUMAR THROUGH HIS FATHER SHRI NARENDRA CHAUDHARY .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Durgesh Kumar Sharma, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Chetanya Puri, Sr. PC with Ms. Vidhi Gupta, GP for UOI with WG CDR K Srikanth and Sgt. Vikash Kumar

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA

¶10

ORDER (ORAL) % 20.08.2025

¶11

C.HARI SHANKAR, J.

¶12

CM APPL. 51310/2025 (for early hearing)

¶13

1. Though this is an application for early hearing, in view of the eminently fair stand adopted by Mr. Chetanya Puri, learned Senior Panel Counsel for the respondents, we are disposing of the writ petition itself.

¶14

2. Mr. Chetanya Puri submits on instructions that the movement order dated 21 July 2025 of the petitioner, following the impugned transfer order dated 6 May 2025 has already been withdrawn.

¶15

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AJITW.P.(C) 11941/2025 KUMAR Signing Da te:2 1.08.2025 19:00:41

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

Apropos the transfer order, he submits that the respondents would treat this writ petition as a representation and take a view thereon, after obtaining an appropriate medical opinion regarding the petitioner within a period of four weeks from today.

¶18

3. Accordingly, we bind the respondents to the said assurance. The decision as and when taken would be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

¶19

4. Needless to say, should the petitioner continue to remain aggrieved by the said decision, the remedies in law with the petitioner shall stand reserved.

¶20

5. The writ petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶21

6. The next date of hearing, i.e., 8 December 2025 stands cancelled.

¶22

C.HARI SHANKAR, J.

¶23

OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J.

¶24

AUGUST 20, 2025 /aky

¶25

Signature Not Verified