Hc Sudheer Yadav v. Union of India and Anr.

Delhi HC2 Feb 2026W.P.(C)/13201/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sudheer Yadav v Union of India; W.P.(C) 13201/2025; Delhi High Court; ITBP transfer order 29.07.2025; Director General Indo-Tibetan Border Police; posting to 61st Bn Likabali Arunachal Pradesh (EHA); compassionate/medical grounds posting; representation dated 23.06.2025 rejected; father 50% disability spinal cord fracture; wife cardiovascular disease; not a family station; accommodation portal 1st-9th of month; specialised treatment Dibrugarh 60 kms; no interference with transfer order; writ petition disposed; coram V. Kameswar Rao and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora; 02.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

No relief on the transfer order itself; the writ petition was disposed of, with the petitioner to apply for accommodation at the place of posting through the portal, such application to be considered in accordance with the Rules. ¶¶26

Hc Sudheer Yadav Vs Union of India and Anr. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the Impugned Transfer Order dated 29.07.2025 transferring the petitioner from Delhi to 61st Battalion, Likabali, Arunachal Pradesh should be quashed/recalled, on the ground that the place of posting is not a family station, provides no accommodation and lacks medical facilities, in view of the petitioner's father's 50% disability and spinal condition and his wife's cardiovascular disease requiring super-specialised treatment. +1 more

¶¶17

Court's answer

In the facts of this case, no interference is called for with the petitioner's transfer order dated 29.07.2025.

¶¶25

Key takeaways

When the petitioner applies for accommodation at the place of posting, such application shall be considered in accordance with the Rules.obiter¶¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (W.P.(C) 13201/2025, decided 02.02.2026; V. Kameswar Rao and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, JJ.) declined to interfere with the transfer order dated 29.07.2025 issued by the Director General, Indo-Tibetan Border Police, transferring petitioner Sudheer Yadav from Delhi to 61st Battalion, Likabali, Arunachal Pradesh (EHA). The petitioner had sought quashing of the order on compassionate/medical grounds — his father suffers 50% disability with spinal cord fracture and related complications, and his wife suffers cardiovascular disease requiring super-specialised treatment — after representations dated 23.06.2025 seeking posting in Delhi or Haryana were rejected. Counsel for the respondents stated on instructions that necessary medical facilities are available at the place of posting, specialised treatment is available at Dibrugarh (60 kms away), and accommodation can be applied for via a portal open from the 1st to the 9th of each month; petitioner's counsel undertook that he would apply for accommodation. Holding that no interference was called for, the High Court disposed of the writ petition, noting that any accommodation application would be considered in accordance with the Rules.

¶1

$~48

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 13201/2025

¶4

SUDHEER YADAV .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Abhishek Ritabh Shukla and Mr. Naman Jain, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr Vinay Yadav, CGSC with advocate Ms Kamna Behrani with Mr Devender Singh, DC/JAG ITBP

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 02.02.2026

¶12

This petition has been filed with the following prayers:

¶13

“a) Issue an appropriate writ, order or directions including the Writ of Certiorari calling for all the relevant records based on which Respondents rejected the representations made by the Petitioner including representation dated 23.06.2025 to Respondent No.2 requesting for posting in Delhi or Haryana in formation/unit as per his initial choice submitted on online portal of Respondent No.2 on extreme compassionate/medical grounds considering the medical condition of the Petitioner’s father and wife and have passed the Impugned Transfer Order dated 29.07.2025 amongst other transfer orders in respect of Petitioner transferring the Petitioner to 61^st Bn in Arunachal Pradesh (EHA) at Serial No. 20 and thereafter, quash all such orders including the said Impugned Transfer Order dated 29.07.2025 passed by the Director General, Indo-Tibetan Border Police in respect of Petitioner to Serial No.20 in respect of Petitioner alongwith other Transfer Orders issued in respect of the Petitioner by Respondents;

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/02/2026 at 12:59:09

¶16

b) Direct the Respondents to transfer the Petitioner on the basis of compassionate/medical grounds to Delhi or Haryana as per his initial choice of place of posting submitted on the online portal of Respondent No. 2 on extreme compassionate grounds; and c) Pass such other and further Order(s) as may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

¶17

In effect, the petitioner is challenging his transfer order dated 29.07.2025 from Delhi to 61^st Battalion, Likabali, Arunachal Pradesh. The primary submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that the place where the petitioner has been transferred to is not a family station; no accommodation shall be provided to the petitioner; the said place lacks medical facilities, which are essential as his father is suffering from 50% disability; spinal cord fracture; conical lordosis, nerve hernia and other complications.

¶18

He also states that even the petitioner’s wife is suffering from cardiovascular diseases that are related to heart and needs treatment at a super specialized hospital having specialist doctors. According to him, the transfer order issued by the respondents need to be re-considered and the petitioner either be retained in Delhi or be posted nearby Haryana.

¶19

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties for some time. The learned counsel for the respondents on instructions from the officer states that the necessary medical facilities are available at the place of posting, and that the specialised treatment is also available at Dibrugarh which is 60 kms away from the place of posting. He also states that the petitioner can apply for an accommodation on the portal which remains open from 01^st to 09^th of each calendar month.

¶20

On this, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/02/2026 at 12:59:09

¶23

shall apply for accommodation at the place of transfer.

¶24

It goes without saying that when such an application is made, the same shall be considered in accordance with the Rules.

¶25

We, are of the view that in the facts of this case, no interference is called for to the transfer order.

¶26

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of.

¶27

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

¶28

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J

¶29

FEBRUARY 02, 2026/ msh

¶30

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/02/2026 at 12:59:09

Hc Sudheer Yadav v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hc Sudheer Yadav v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

UOI & Ors. Vs Kasturi Devi

Bhartiya Postal Emp Unoin & an Vs U.O.I & Anr.

Urmila Devi Vs UOI & Ors.

Attar Singh Kashyap Vs UOI & Ors.

Pravin Pandurang Mokal & Anr. Vs the District Medical Board

Lakshay Creation Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 60(7) Delhi

Rwa Dwarka Punarwas Colony (Regd.) Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Bhuneshwar Vats Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Chandra Prakash Tiwari, Ex SGT642859 Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ex Cadet Jai Swarup Wal Vs Union of India & Ors.

Tirthankar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Hfl Youdhisthir Singh Rted Vs Union of India & Ors.

Madan Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Mwo Prakash Chandra Lenka Vs Union of India and Ors.