$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 327/2026, CM APPL. 1572/2026, CM APPL. 1573/2026, CM APPL. 7185/2026 POONAM YADAV .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Jasbir Bidhuri, Advocate for Mr. Shashwat Sharma, Advocate.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rahul Sambher, SPC with Ms. Disha Choudhary, GP for R-1.

Mr. Somesh Chandra Jha and Ms. Pyoli, Advocate for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 03.02.2026

1. The Petitioner is presently working as a PGT (Commerce) at EMRS Padmabil, Khowai, Tripura, under the aegis of the National Education Society for Tribal Students (“NESTS”). She has been transferred to EMRS Karanjia, Mayurbhanj, Odisha, by office order dated 26^th December, 2025.

Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition has been filed.

2. On the previous date of hearing i.e., 9^th January, 2026, the Court passed the following order:

“1. The Petitioner is working as a PGT (Commerce) at EMRS Padmabil, Khowai, Tripura, under the National Education Society for Tribal Students.1

2. The grievance of the Petitioner arises from the impugned order

1 “NESTS”

dated 26^th December, 2025, whereby she has been transferred from her present place of posting at EMRS Padmabil, Khowai, Tripura, to EMRS Karanjia, Mayurbhanj, Odisha.

3. Counsel for the Petitioner places reliance on Clause 4.6 of the National Education Society for Tribal Students Transfer Policy, 2024, which provides for priority categories and specifically recognises the “Spouse Category” under Clause 4.6(b). Reliance is also placed on SK Nausad Rahaman v. Union of India, (2022) 12 SCC 1 in support of the aforesaid submission.

4. It is submitted that a representation dated 31^st December, 2025, seeking consideration under the said clause, has been made to the Respondents but remains undecided. It is further contended that there is no existing vacancy for the post of PGT (Commerce) at EMRS, Odisha, and therefore no administrative exigency warranting the Petitioner’s transfer.

5. In any event, counsel for Petitioner, after making some submissions, states that he would confine his prayer to seeking a direction for keeping the impugned transfer order dated 26^th December, 2025, in abeyance till 31^st March, 2026, subject to the outcome of the Petitioner’s representation.

6. In view of the aforesaid submission, the following directions are issued:

(i) The Respondents shall consider and decide the Petitioner’s representation dated 31^st December, 2025 and communicate the decision to the Petitioner within a period of two weeks from today.

(ii) Till the next date of hearing, the impugned transfer order dated

26^th December, 2025, shall remain in abeyance.

(iii) The Respondents shall not insist upon the Petitioner joining at the transferred place of posting, and the Petitioner shall, for the present, continue to discharge her duties at EMRS Padmabil, Khowai, Tripura.

7. Issue notice to the Respondents, by all permissible modes, upon filing of process fee, returnable on the next date of hearing.

8. Renotify on 3^rd February, 2026.

9. Dasti under the signatures of court master.”

3. From the above, it is apparent that the impugned transfer order was kept in abeyance, subject to the outcome of the Petitioner’s representation dated 31^st December, 2025. The Respondents were directed to consider and decide the said representation within a stipulated time.

4. Counsel for the Respondents submits that pursuant to the directions of

this Court, the Petitioner’s representation has been duly considered and has since been rejected. Consequently, the interim protection granted earlier stood exhausted.

5. It is, however, noted that at the time of passing of the order dated 9^th January, 2026, counsel for the Petitioner had expressly undertaken before this Court that the relief would be confined to seeking deferment of the transfer order till 31^st March, 2026.

6. On the other hand, counsel for the Respondents submits that EMRS Karanjia, Mayurbhanj, Odisha has formally requisitioned th