Shashikant Tiwari Vs Department of Official Language and Ors. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Shashikant Tiwari Vs Department of Official Language and Ors. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of without interfering with the impugned order of the Tribunal; liberty reserved to the petitioner to seek appropriate relief in respect of the absence of cashless medical facilities at the place to which he has been posted.

Issue for consideration

Whether the High Court should interfere with the Tribunal's interim order refusing to stay the petitioner's transfer. +2 more

Court's answer

The Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned interim order of the Tribunal, as it is purely discretionary.

Ratio / Principle

Absence of cashless medical facilities at the place of posting may constitute a separate grievance, but it cannot be a ground to stay the transfer order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition disposed of (High Court of Delhi; C. Hari Shankar and Vinod Kumar, JJ.; oral order dated 10.07.2026) challenging an interim order of the Tribunal refusing to stay the petitioner Shashikant Tiwari's transfer from the DGHS to a posting under the Ministry of Earth Sciences — an intra-Delhi transfer effected before the expiry of his five-year tenure. The petitioner, a Group A employee who had sought the stay solely because the new posting would disentitle him to cashless medical facilities (he and his family having suffered ailments after COVID-19 treatment), argued through learned Senior Counsel that cashless facilities formed part of the reasonable accommodation owed to him as a differently abled person. Held: the Tribunal's interim order was purely discretionary and merited no interference; mere non-availability of cashless medical facilities at the place of posting, the transfer being within the city, is not a sufficient ground to stay the transfer; such absence may constitute a separate grievance but cannot be a ground to stay the transfer order. Petition disposed of without interfering with the impugned order, with liberty reserved to seek appropriate relief on the medical-facilities grievance; the reasonable-accommodation contention was left open.

$~24

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

W.P.(C) 9132/2026 and CM APPLs.42829-832/2026

SHASHIKANT TIWARI .....Petitioner

Through: Mr Colin Gonsalves, Senior Advocate, Mr Jepi Y Chisho and Mr Atul Chakma, Advocates

versus

DEPARTMENT OF OFFICIAL LANGUAGE AND ORS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Devvrat Yadav, SPC and Mr. Kartik Sharma (G.P) for UOI Ms Pallavi Talwar GP for R1 to 5

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

ORDER (ORAL) % 10.07.2026

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

1. This writ petition assails an interim order passed by the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has refused to stay the transfer of the petitioner, which we may note, is within the city of Delhi.

2. The only ground on which the petitioner sought a stay of the transfer was that he was being transferred from the DGHS to a posting under the Ministry of Earth Sciences, which would disentitle him to cashless medical facilities.

3. Mr. Gonsalves, learned Senior Counsel submits that, pursuant to the treatment which had been undertaken by the petitioner and his Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AJITW.P.(C) 9132/2026 Page 1 of 3 KUMAR Signing Da te:1 3.07.2026 15:54:46

family during the COVID 19 pandemic, they all have suffered medical ailments, which was the reason why the petitioner had been transferred to the DGHS. He further submits that the transfer to the Ministry of Earth Sciences has taken place before the expiry of his tenure of five years.

4. We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order of the Tribunal as it is purely discretionary. The Tribunal has taken a conscious view that a mere non-availability of cashless medical facilities at the place where the petitioner has been posted, especially keeping in mind that the transfer is within the city, does not constitute sufficient ground to stay the transfer.

5. We also note that the petitioner is a Group A employee. Mr. Gonsalves submits, however, that the availability of cashless medical facilities at the place of posting of the petitioner is a part of the reasonable accommodation to which the petitioner is entitled as a differently abled person.

6. The absence of cashless medical facilities at the place of posting may constitute a separate grievance; it cannot, however, be a ground to stay the transfer order.

7. In that view of the matter, we dispose of this writ petition without interfering with the impugned order, reserving liberty with the petitioner to seek appropriate relief in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that no cashless medical facilities are available at the place to which the petitioner has been posted.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AJITW.P.(C) 9132/2026 Page 2 of 3 KUMAR Signing Da te:1 3.07.2026 15:54:46

8. The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

VINOD KUMAR, J.

JULY 10, 2026 /yg

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR Signing Da te:1 3.07.2026 15:54:46

W.P.(C) 9132/2026 Page 3 of 3