High CourtsDivision Bench(2026) 07 DEL CK 1112

Shashikant Tiwari vs Department Of Official Language & Ors.

Delhi High Court, Principal Bench, New Delhi · Decided on 10 July 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
C. Hari Shankar, J · Vinod Kumar, J
CASE NUMBER
W.P.(C) 9132/2026 and CM APPLs.42829-832/2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 350 words

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 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.

8.

The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly.