ASI(M) SADHNA vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~58 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 16323/2025, CM APPL. 66818/2025 & CM APPL. 66819/2025 ASI(M) SADHNA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Mr. Mayank Chauhan and Mr. Prabhav Pachauri, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Pratima N. Lakra CGSC, Mr. Aditya Kashyap GP Mr Vinod Sawant Law Officer CRPF, Insp Athurv CRPF, Mr Ramniwas Yadav CRPF CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 28.10.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J 1. The petitioner assails her transfer from Jharoda Kalan, New Delhi to Pinjore. 2. The grounds urged by Mr. Aggarwal, learned Counsel for the petitioner, to sustain the challenge, are that (i) the petitioner is presently participating in an inquiry following allegations of sexual harassment made by her against her senior officer, (ii) her children are school going and the academic session is ongoing presently and (iii) the petitioner has family support in Delhi. Signature Not Verified Signed By:PREETI W.P.(C) 16323/2025 Page 1 of 3 Signing Date:29.10.2025 18:33:05 3. To our mind, these considerations cannot constitutes legitimate grounds on the basis of which we could interdict the petitioner’s transfer. 4. The petitioner is an employee of a para-military force. Courts have to be circumspect in interfering with postings of persons in paramilitary forces unless the posting is prima facie violative of some established Rule, guideline or norm is found to be mala fide or based on ulterior considerations. 5. No such infirmity plagues the transfer of the petitioner to Pinjore in the present case. 6. Mr. Aggarwal has not been able to show us any instructions on the basis of which the petitioner is entitled to continue here till the end of the academic sessio