The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with the transfer of a Kendriya Vidyalaya teacher, holding that administrative decisions on postings cannot be lightly disturbed unless clear illegality is shown. The court also found no sufficient proof to extend special protection on medical grounds.
Background of the Case
The case, Ms Shalu Pruthi vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Anr., arose after the petitioner challenged her transfer from Delhi to Babugarh Cantt. in the Agra region.
Ms Pruthi, a Primary Teacher appointed in 2009, had been serving in Delhi for over a decade. Her transfer was part of a larger rationalisation exercise undertaken by the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) following directions linked to earlier litigation.
Read also:- Second Application for Compensation Re-determination Maintainable After High Court Ruling: Supreme Court
She had opted for postings in Faridabad, Ghaziabad, and Noida. However, due to lack of vacancies, she was posted to Babugarh Cantt., which authorities said was relatively close to her preferred locations.
The petitioner challenged the move primarily on medical grounds, stating she suffers from Bipolar Affective Disorder and requires continuous treatment and family support.
Her counsel argued that:
- The authorities failed to provide “reasonable accommodation”
- Her condition should be considered under disability protections
- The transfer policy was applied rigidly, ignoring humanitarian concerns
It was also argued that similarly placed employees had been given relief, suggesting unequal treatment.
Read also:- Punjab & Haryana HC Refuses Habeas Corpus in Child Custody Row, Says Dispute Belongs Before Family Court
KVS defended the transfer, stating it was carried out strictly in line with policy and Supreme Court directions.
The organisation maintained:
- The petitioner could not be accommodated at preferred stations due to vacancy constraints
- Babugarh Cantt. was allotted as the nearest feasible option
- Her medical documents did not meet the threshold required under the transfer policy
Officials emphasized that transfer is an inherent part of service, especially in an all-India cadre.
A bench of Justice Anil Kshetrapal and Justice Amit Mahajan noted that judicial review in transfer matters is limited.
“The transfer is an incident of service… an employee cannot claim posting at a particular place as a matter of right,” the court observed.
Read also:- Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Hyderabad Land Case, Flags Misuse of Execution Proceedings
On medical grounds, the court found that although the petitioner was undergoing treatment, there was no certification showing the level of mental disability required under the policy.
The judges also noted that:
- The competent authority had considered her representation
- A reasoned order was passed rejecting her request
- No arbitrariness or mala fide intent was established
Regarding disability rights, the court acknowledged the principle of reasonable accommodation but clarified that it applies only when the factual threshold is met.
The High Court upheld the tribunal’s order and dismissed the petition, finding no illegality, perversity, or jurisdictional error.
“The impugned order does not warrant interference under Article 226,” the bench concluded.
All pending applications were also disposed of.
Case Details
Case Title: Ms Shalu Pruthi vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Anr.
Case Number: W.P.(C) 3022/2026
Court: Delhi High Court
Judges: Justice Anil Kshetrapal, Justice Amit Mahajan
Decision Date: 25 March 2026
