High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/19064/2025

Chaman Lal v. Union Of India Through The Director General, Indo Tibetan Border Police & ORS.

2025-12-18Hon'Ble Mr. Justice C.Hari Shankar,Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash Shukla2 pages

Mr. Umesh Narang, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, INDO TIBETAN BORDER POLICE & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Shekhar Kumar, SPC with Mr Varun Pratap Singh, GP and Mr.

Devender Singh, DC (JAG)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 18.12.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

The petitioner, who is with the Indo Tibetan Border Police, suffered frost bite while serving at the border, resulting in amputation of both his lower limbs. A Court of Inquiry was conducted to examine his condition. The Court of Inquiry, on 10 December 2008, advised that, given the fact that the petitioner was an amputee of both lower limbs, he be retained in a place close to his home town. The petitioner's home town is Mandi in Himachal Pradesh. 2.

The petitioner has been transferred to Kanpur, which is 950 kms away.

Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition, seeking quashing of his order of transfer to Kanpur and issuance of a mandamus directing the respondents to transfer him to a place near his hometown. Mr. Umesh Narang suggests Chandigarh. 4.

Mr. Shekhar Kumar, learned SPC, very fairly states that, given the peculiar circumstances of this case, he has instructions not to oppose the challenge to the petitioner's transfer order. The respondents undertake, therefore, to post the petitioner appropriately, as per the recommendations of the Court of Inquiry. 5.

In that view of the matter, the grievance in the petition does not survive for consideration. We direct that the petitioner be either permitted to remain where he is, or posted at a nearby place, in accordance with the recommendations of the Court of Inquiry. Till then, the petitioner would continue at his present place of posting. 6.