Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Poonam Kaushik vs Kvs on 15 October, 2025
1 OA No. 1526/2025
Item 16 (C-3)
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
O.A. No. 1526/2025 With M.A No. 1750/2025
Reserved on : 19.09.2025
Pronounced on : 15.10.2025
Hon'ble Mrs. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)
POONAM KAUSHIK
D/O SH. MAHABIR PRASAD KAUSHIK
PRESENTLY POSTED AS PGT (HINDI)
AT KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA NO. 2, MRN,
MATHURA, UTTAR PRADESH.
R/O 74, NEAR BRAHMIN CHAUPAL,
VPO PEHLADPUR (BANGAR), DELHI-110042.
PRESENTLY R/O 1/63, REFINERY NAGAR,
MATHURA, UTTAR PRADESH. ......Applicant
(By Advocate : Mr. Manish Kumar Sharma)
Versus
1 KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN
through COMMISSIONER KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN
HQ 18, INSTITUTIONAL AREA,
SHAHID JIT SINGH MARG
NEW DELHI-110016.
2 KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN
through DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AGRA
REGIONAL OFFICE KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN
K.V NO. 2, AGRA CANTT AGRA,
UTTAR PRADESH-282001
3. KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN
through ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ESTT. 2 & 3)
KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN HQ 18,
INSTITUTIONAL AREA,
SHAHID JIT SINGH MARG NEW DELHI-110016.
2 OA No. 1526/2025
Item 16 (C-3)
4. SH. SANJAY KUMAR SHARMA, PRINCIPAL
S/O SH. BANGALI MAL SHARMA,
KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA MATHURA REFINERY
REFINERY NAGAR, MATHURA
UTTAR PRADESH-281006.
R/O Q. NO. 5/75, SECTOR - 5,
TOWNSHIP REFINERY NAGAR, MATHURA,
UTTAR PRADESH-281006. ....Respondents
(By Advocate : Mr. S. Rajappa Kumar Sharma)
ORDER
Per Hon'ble Mrs. Harvinder Oberoi, Member (J) :
The subject matter of this OA is transfer. The applicant is aggrieved by the action of the respondents in denying her the status of a single parent thereby not considering her in the category of single parent of a girl child in the transfer portal. Aggrieved the applicant approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following reliefs:-
"i) To call for records pertaining to category of the Applicant for changing her status to that of a single parent in the transfer portal and to fix the responsibility for unauthorized changes therein
ii) To quash/ withdraw the employee profile document pertaining to the Applicant dated 31.03.2025 issued under the signatures of Respondent No. 4 in so far as it pertains to the Applicant.
iii) To direct the Respondents for considering the representation of the Applicant by treating her as an employee under the category of the single parent
iv) To invite, allow and consider the representation of applicant against the impugned employee profile document 3 OA No. 1526/2025 Item 16 (C-3) and dispose the same in accordance with the guidelines by passing speaking orders.
v) To allow the Applicant to fill her online choices in the transfer portal of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan as per the transfer policy for employees who are single parents.
vi) Award costs of and incidental to this application;
vii) Pass such other orders or directions as deemed just fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant joined the KVS as PGT (Hindi) in the year 2008 and is presently posted at Kendriya Vidyalaya No. 2, Refinery Nagar, Mathura. In the year 2024 the applicant got divorced from her husband and her status of divorcee was recorded in her service records. As per the counsel of the applicant, after divorce of the applicant, her minor daughter (8 years old) started residing with her as she got her legal custody. Also she is studying in the same school where the applicant is a Teacher. Thus the decree of divorce confirmed the applicant's status as a single parent. However, this status was not updated in the applicant's profile. Had it been uploaded, it would have been advantageous to her, as single parents are entitled to higher transfer counts and lower displacement counts under the KVS transfer policy. Aggrieved, the applicant preferred several representations to the respondents for amending her status as 'Single Parent'. However, the respondents, particularly, the respondent no. 4 Sh. S. K. Sharma, Principal, KV No. 4 OA No. 1526/2025 Item 16 (C-3) 2, MRN Nagar under the capacity of controlling officer of the applicant who is authorized to amend and maintain the employees' profile in the transfer portal, did not do the needful and denied her the status of a single parent. Rather, he mala fidely asked the applicant to submit a hypothetical declaration to that effect for availing the said benefit which is against the policy of KVS as the KVS has not specified any such declaration or proforma for availing the benefit of a single parent for transfer. Counsel further highlighted that the entry of divorce decree in the service record of the applicant was done on 15.01.2025 and based on the same, the entry in her online personal information management system was changed to 'Yes' against the single parent category on 25.01.2025 by the concerned in charge. However, the respondent no. 4 secretly modified the said entry in the portal as 'No' against the single parent category to thwart the applicant to apply for transfer this year. According to the counsel, the competent authority has also failed to take any action in this matter. Thus, the action of the respondent no. 4 as well as other respondents proves biasness and mala fide intention against the applicant. Therefore, the applicant was constrained to file this OA.
3. Per contra, the counsel of the respondent nos. 1 to 3 vehemently opposed the OA as well as the arguments of the counsel of the applicant stating that before the notification of transfers for the year 2025 i.e., on 21.04.2025, the Vidyalaya had to update the PIMS 5 OA No. 1526/2025 Item 16 (C-3) portal of the employees of the KVS. During updation of PIMS portal the applicant misrepresented about her divorce entry to the member of the PIMS updating committee and got the status of single parent on the PIMS portal. Due to non-submission of parenthood custody of her daughter through any Court, KVS did not accept her status of 'Single Parent' and consequently did not forward her name under the single parent category on the transfer portal. Counsel highlighted Part-I, Para 2 (XVI) of the KVS Transfer Policy which defines the single parent. The same is reproduced below :-
"A KVS employee who has lost his/her spouse or has been separated by court of law and who has attained parenthood through custody from court, surrogacy or legal adoption".
According to the respondents the applicant did not fall under the aforesaid definition of Single Parent and thus due to non-availability of legal court orders of custody of her daughter after dissolution of her marriage, the applicant's name had not been forwarded under the single parent category on the transfer portal. He argued that the applicant had filed this frivolous case for which cost should be imposed on her. To strengthen this argument counsel for the respondents relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Charu Kishor Mehta vs. Prakash Patel and Others - 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1962 dated 22.06.2022 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court while dismissing the said case had upheld the decision of the Hon'ble 6 OA No. 1526/2025 Item 16 (C-3) Bombay High Court who had imposed a cost of Rs.5 Lakh on the petitioner therein for abuse of law. For more clarity, the excerpts of the said decision are as under :-
"19. We are totally in agreement with the above observations of the two courts and the order passed by the trial court allowing the application under Order VII, Rule 11 of the CPC the Bombay High Court dated 13.06.2022 and upholding that order and dismissing the appeal of the present Petitioner. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Bombay High Court was absolutely justified in imposing the cost of Rs. 5 lakh, on the Petitioner. It is not only the proceedings before the Civil Court initiated by the Petitioner in the year 2022 which was on abuse of the law, but the entire conduct of the petitioner is a clear reflection of the fact that the petitioner has been doing so repeatedly, after being a signatory to the settlement as back as 01.10.2013.
20. The Supreme Court in Dalip Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, reported in (2010) 2 SCC 114 has this to say for methods adopted at the hands of litigants under similar circumstances. Paragraph nos. 1 and 2 as produced below:
"1. For many centuries, Indian society cherished two basic values of life i.e., 'Satya' (truth) and 'Ahimsa (non- violence). Mahavir, Gautam Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi guided the people to ingrain these values in their daily life. Truth constituted an integral part of justice delivery system which was in vogue in pre-independence era and the people used to feel proud to tell truth in the courts irrespective of the consequences. However, post- independence period has seen drastic changes in our value system. The materialism has over-shadowed the old ethos and the quest for personal gain has become so intense that those involved in litigation do not hesitate to take shelter of falsehood, misrepresentation and suppression of facts in the court proceedings.
2. In the last 40 years, a new creed of litigants has cropped up. Those who belong to this creed do not have any respect for truth. They shamelessly resort to falsehood and unethical means for achieving their goals. In order to meet the challenge posed by this new creed of litigants, the courts have, from time to time, evolved new rules and it is now well established that a litigant, who attempts to pollute the stream of justice or who touches the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands, is not entitled to any relief, interim or final."7 OA No. 1526/2025
Item 16 (C-3)
21. We may record here that we were initially persuaded in this case, to initiate contempt proceedings against the Petitioner, considering that there has been a deliberate attempt on her part in the non-disclosure of absolutely relevant facts before this Court. We are not doing so purely due to the age of the Petitioner as she is a lady of 78 years of age. The present petition is no doubt an abuse of the process of law and has caused harm to the other parties to the litigation, some of whom may have been needlessly drawn into the litigation. We may refer here an observation given in the case of Subrata Roy Sahara v. Union of India, (2014) 8 SCC 470:
"191. The Indian judicial system is grossly afflicted, with frivolous litigation. Ways and means need to be evolved, to deter litigants from their compulsive obsession, towards senseless and ill-considered claims. One needs to keep in mind, that in the process of litigation, there is an innocent sufferer on the other side, of every irresponsible and senseless claim. He suffers long drawn anxious periods of nervousness and restlessness, whilst the litigation is pending, without any fault on his part."
22. The petition is accordingly dismissed.
23. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of."
4. Rebutting the contentions of the respondents the applicant filed rejoinder stating that the divorce decree judicially recognised the applicant's custodian status. To buttress his argument, counsel relied upon the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 and Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956. Hence, the applicant falls within the definition of 'Single Parent' under the KVS Transfer Policy.
5. During the course of arguments the counsel for the applicant handed across the Bar copies of various documents including the Decree by the Family Court, judgment of Divorce, merit certificates, details sheet of the applicant, Statement of Imputation of Misconduct 8 OA No. 1526/2025 Item 16 (C-3) against the applicant containing four Article of Charges as well as the E-mail sent by the applicant to the Respondent no. 4 - Principal, KVS No. 2 Mathura. The contents of her e-mail are quoted below :-
"1) The allegation under Article 01 imposed on me by you, regarding irrelevant entry in PIMS Data is totally false and based on irrelevant facts, since entry of Legally Separated Divorce was made in my Service Book under your signature and seal, based on that Point "Single Parent" was entered as "YES" by Mrs. Shweta Arora, PGT (Computer Science), in my PIMS Data and which I personally noticed on 12.01.2025 while checking my PIMS Data Profile, but on 25.01.2025, when I again checked my PIMS Data Profile, and shocked to see that the entry point as "Single Parent" was showing "NO", which is clear manipulate in my PIMS Data Profile by The he Principal as the password related to PIMS Data Profile of all employees is protected by the Principal alone and no one can manipulate it, when I enquired it. Mrs. Shweta Arora, PGT, (Computer Science) also agreed to my doubt that it was manipulated by the Principal himself, and that too without informing me by any message:
(2) that due to busy schedule owing to CBSE Exams preparations, on 14.02.2025, Mrs. Shweta Arora, PGT (Computer Science) the Head of committee consisting three other teachers constituted for making entries and updating PIMS Data Profile suggested me to talk to Principal Sir regarding rectification, accordingly approached you in the matter, but you clearly denied to make single parent entry in my PIMS Data Profile, that too when I have submitted Divorce Decree and Judgment thereof delivered by Hon'ble Court, wherein it is clearly elaborated that custody of my single and minor daughter will rest with me alone and How can it be denied to follow Hon'ble Court Order and Judgment which is directly relates and affects the life on my daughter and myself too by the Principal at his own will? Moreover, when there is clear entry alongwith Birth Certificate of my daughter, then what is the relevancy of such denial, Principal being the Head of School and custodian of Records be asked in writing (3) that such deeds show and confirm the tyrannical attitude of Principal by twisting rules and manipulation of facts by misusing using lights conferred by KVS.
(4) that such mental torture and harassment by The Principal is continuing and increasing day by day which is prima-facie clear and proved by serving me Memoranda regularly for the last several months especially after my 9 OA No. 1526/2025 Item 16 (C-3) divorce, had it not been so, then why Principal is denying the documents and Judgment copy enclosed far kind perusal related to my personal life, and is Principal is over and above the Court of law? Is it not defamation of Hon'ble Court? The matter be probed into by setting "Inquiry".
(5) that the entry related to divorce made in Service Book was made even after repeatedly requests and representations submitted several times in past, (copies enclosed), (6) that motto behind all these is that I may not get benefits of being single parent in transfer portal and trapping me in Disciplinary Proceedings to prepare a ground for deprive me of my legitimate rights and disturb the studies of my daughter too, (7) that the another allegation imposed by the Principal on me is that I am disturbing school functioning is also false because Principal himself is indulged in provoking me By one or other excuse every day in every manner, the continuing routine served Memorandum is evident to it. (8) that such acts of Principal against a lady teacher and single mother parent are self evidence to intention of Principal and put a question mark on Principal adopting mean and biased practices being exercised for the past long. (9) that The Principal in this way is harassing me, but also putting the studies of my single minor daughter aged eight years at present and causing harm to my class students also, because the concentration to be focused towards students' welfare is wasting in submitting reply to routine memorandum based on false excuse being served to me, is it not depriving students of their studies in my subject? (10) that if the allegation imposed on me are true and fact based, and I am creating nuisance then why the Principal not brought the matter to the notice of KVS Higher Authorities, apart from it when The Deputy Commissioner, KVS Agra Region made several visit to the Vidyalaya, I personally requested to set up inquiry in the matter, but regret to say that no such action was initiated. Can an employee who is being stated by the Principal as "accused" will himself or herself demand to set up inquiry? (11) that; the allegation of telling lie in the matter of receiving PIMS Data letter sent by hand and email on 10.02.2025 imposed on me by the Principal on 14.02.2025 is also false and baseless, because had i been informed by any mean, then why Principal is not showing the receipt of such letter or attached the screenshot of email to 10 OA No. 1526/2025 Item 16 (C-3) Memorandum served? which I demanded to Principal in the presence of Committee. Members namely Mrs Shweta Arora, PGT, Sh. Kapil Mahajan, TGT, Sh. Krishan Kumar Gautam, PGT and Mrs Indu Bhoj TGT.
(12) that, on the basis of above, it may be decided that who is telling lie myself or Principal? The fact is that after making divorce decree entry on 15.01.2025, in my Service Book and based on that entering "YES" on 25.01.2025, against relevant column in PIMS Data Profile by Mrs. Shweta Arora, PGT, the same was manipulated as "NO" secretly by the Principal without informing me, because the profile is operated by PASSWORD protected by the Principal, and is it justified to alter personal details of an employee by the Principal that too even after Hon'ble Court Order and Judgment at own without informing about it? The matter requires justification in writing from the Principal and set up inquiry.
(13) that, representations to set up inquiry have already been submitted to the Deputy Commissioner, XVS Agra Region on 18.12.2024 and 21.12.2024 (copies enclosed for ready reference). Under pre planned way with maladies intention and partiality I was assigned outstation duties that too when exams. of my daughter were going on in Vidyalaya and I am alone here to look after her in every way, and there is nane who could take responsibility for safety and security of my daughter, whereas other classmates were available and the event was not related to my subject Le. Social Science Exhibition at Agra. The Mott behind is to disturb my mental peace and temper adversely the studies of my daughter. This if I have committed mistake which seems a serious crime in view of the Principal, then why action was not initiated against me and if I am a habitual defaulter as per language and text of Memorandum then, why the Principal brought it to the notice of KVS Authorities? (14) that under Article 3 of memorandum, Principal alleged me of denying CBSE paid duty on 17.02.2025 is also false and baseless, because had I such disobedience, then why i performed assigned CBSE paid duty on 15, 20 and 25.02.2025. The fact is this that I was not informed about CBSE duty for 17.02.2025, by any mean though I was present full time in Vidyalaya. As per due procedure every CBSE Exams Duty is assigned in advance with the signature of Principal by obtaining signature of employee concerned in Register kept with CBSE Exams Incharge, but the fact is this that no such intimation was given to me and duty register containing my name was shown to me on the said date at the eleventh hour I was informed by Sh. Pankaj, Guard that I have been assigned CBSE Duty when I contacted CBSE Exams Incharge about the matter, he instantly replied that 11 OA No. 1526/2025 Item 16 (C-3) another teacher has been deployed in my place since I refused to accept and sign the duty, further when I asked Sh. Pankaj, Security Guard that who is saying that Mrs. Poonam Kaushik is denying Duty, he very honestly said that he was instructed by the Principal to write "Mrs. Poonam Kaushik, PGT denied duty so in Duty Register otherwise he will be terminated and all this he wrote under pressure and threat of Principal, otherwise he was totally ignorant about it.
The truth is that Sh. Pankaj, Security Guard had not come to me carrying Duty Register. This truth came to my knowledge an 25.02.2025, when Sh. Pankaj, Security Guard brought Duty Register to me for obtaining signature and I was turning leaf where it was written "Mrs Poonam Kaushik, PGT Hindi denied duty (15) that, under Article 4, Principal alleged me of making baseless complaints is also false as had I done so, then why did the Principal not asked in writing to prove it.? In fact it is not else but to prepare grounds and documentary proofs to initiate Disciplinary Proceedings against me so that I may be deprived of filling Online Transfer Form.
(16) that it is not the end of such malpractices rather increasing day by day and continuing till now. (17) that; had Principal ever tried to find the facts instead of regularly harassing me mentally and destroying my career, personal life and studies of my single daughter, even after falling under single mother parent category and who even then has produced 100% CBSE Exams Results with 2nd Highest P.. in KV, 2 Refinery Nagar Mathura, for which I have been awarded "Merit Certificate" by KVS. Apart from it but not to self praise NARAKAS Mathura has also awarded me certificate and Prize for Promoting usage of Rajbhasha Hindi during Rajbhasha Fortnight last year. (Copies enclosed) which altimetry brought name to KVS. (18) that lastly to sum up I with being aggrieved from all such malpractices, conspiracies and partially at every stage, compelled to write the true fact that Principal is totally busy in harassing a lady teacher and single mother parent and has destroyed my mental peace, career and personal life, and side-effect of it is that not alone but my single daughter is suffering adversely."
6. Respondents also handed across the Bar various documents including detailed chronological communication between the applicant 12 OA No. 1526/2025 Item 16 (C-3) and the office of the Principal, KV MRN. The same is reproduced below:-
"1. Initial Submission of Divorce Decree On 30.12.2024, Mrs. Poonam Kaushik sent an email to the official school account citing the subject "1. Updation of PIMS Data 2. Entry in Service Book" and attached a one- page Decree of Divorce relating to the dissolution of her marriage with Mr. Sanjay Ghosh.
This was further confirmed via a written application submitted on 07.01.2025, along with the same attachment. (Annexure 1-5)
2. Letter for Single Parenthood In response, on 10.01.2025, the Office of the Principal issued a letter to Mrs. Poonam Kaushik advising ber to submit a document of Single Parent status issued by a competent Government authority. Mrs. Poonam Kaushik declined to receive the letter, which was subsequently forwarded to her official email the same day. (Annexure 6-
8)
3. Repeated Submission of Divorce Decree On 12.01.2025 and 13.01.2025, Mrs. Poonam Kaushik again sent the same divorce decree in school email, and reiterated this through a written application dated 15.01.2025, stating:
"Divorce decree has been provided to me as per Hon'ble Court order. (Annexure 9-13)
4. Service Book Update Based on the Jecree, an entry regarding divorce was made in service book of Mrs. Poonam Kaushik on 15.01.2025, and a copy of the relevant page was received by her on the same date. (Annexure 14
5. Misrepresentation in PIMS Subsequently, Mrs. Poonam Kaushik misrepresented about her divorce entry to Mrs. Shweta Arora, a member of the PIMS Committee, and succeeded in obtaining a "Single Parent" status in her PIMS profile. Later Mrs. Shweta Arora reported the matter to the Principal and was instructed to rectify the entry. A written enquiry was issued to Mrs. Shweta Arora on 13.03.2025, asking a detailed explanation of the incident. (Annexure 15-16) 13 OA No. 1526/2025 Item 16 (C-3)
6. Clarification of Role in PIMS Updation It is important to note that PIMS updates are handled by a designated team. Any allegation of manipulation of PIMS data by the Principal is baseless and appears to be made with malafide intent.
7. False Claim of Document Submission On 29.03.2025, Mrs. Poonam Kaushik emailed the school, falsely asserting that she had submitted all required documents supporting her single parent status by hand to the Principal. (Annexure 17)
8. Official Response and Clarification On 30.03.2025, the Principal's office responded by referencing all prior correspondence, clearly stating that no valid legal document confirming her single parent status- particularly any custody order-had been submitted. She was advised again to furnish the same via email for proper documentation and review under the KVS Transfer Policy. A copy of the relevant portion of the policy defining "Single Parent" was also attached. No response or document was received by any means thereafter. (Annexure 17)
9. Repeated Non-Compliance A formal letter was again issued on 28.04.2025, reiterating the advice for submission of a legal custody document. The letter was declined by Mrs. Poonam Kaushik and was again sent via official email. In her reply dated 28.04.2025, she made factually incorrect statements but did not produce the required legal document in school email for justifying her assertions. (Annexure 18-20)
10. Failure to Submit Custody Order Despite being given multiple opportunities, Mrs. Poonam Kaushik failed to produce any court order establishing her legal custody of the child. Her consistent failure to do so appears to be a deliberate act of withholding material information central to her claim under the KVS Transfer Policy.
11. Misrepresentation before Hon'ble CAT It is pertinent to note that Mrs. Poonam Kaushik, while not submitting the court order to the school, later produced the same document before the Hon'ble CAT. This raises serious concerns of suppression of facts and misrepresentation, potentially misleading the Tribunal and mischaracterizing the position of KVS in the matter.14 OA No. 1526/2025
Item 16 (C-3) Conclusion As per KVS Transfer Policy, Part-1, Para 2 (xvi) under Definitions, a Single Parent (SP) is defined as:
"A KVS employee who has lost his/her spouse or has been separated by a court of law and who has attained parenthood through custody from court, surrogacy or legal adoption."
This definition clearly mandates that custody of the child through legal means such as a court order-is a prerequisite to claim the status of a Single Parent.
However, in the case of Mrs. Poonam Kaushik, she has repeatedly claimed herself to be a "Single Parent" by submitting only a one-page Divorce Decree, which mentions solely the dissolution of marriage and contains no explicit mention of child custody. Such a document, in isolation, does not fulfil the definition as provided under KVS policy. Mrs. Poonam Kaushik, an employee of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KV5), deliberately withheld a crucial five-page court judgment from the office of the Principal, KV MRN, despite repeated instructions to submit documentation pertaining to the custody of the child in her favour, which forms the central basis for her claim of single parenthood status The said judgment, which substantiates her claim, was never submitted to the office of the Principal KV MRN till date, thereby constituting a clear case of suppression of material facts. Instead, she has submitted this five-page court judgment before the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), New Delhi, in connection with O.A. No, 1526 of 2025.
By concealing such a material document at the institutional level while producing the same before the Tribunal, Mrs. Poonam Kaushik has mischaracterized the position of KVS, thereby bringing disrepute to the organization and obstructing the due administrative process."
7. We have heard the rival submissions, examined the pleadings and documents on record and perused the Ruling cited by the respondents. This case was heard at some length on 17.09.2025 where respondent no. 4 - Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya, Mathura 15 OA No. 1526/2025 Item 16 (C-3) Refinery, Mathura was directed to remain present in person on 19.09.2025. On that day, both Principal and the applicant were present in the Court. We observed that the Principal did not initially disclose that a charge sheet had been slapped on the applicant. During the course of arguments later when this fact came to light, we were totally taken by surprise. This makes us feel that the Principal does not have a clear heart and clean hands. The applicant who is already suffering has been victimized by the Principal who has ulterior motives and mala fide intentions. It is also not convincing that how the Principal could have missed the vital information in the Divorce Decree and Judgment about the custody of the minor girl child with the applicant - the single parent/mother. We are therefore of the considered opinion that gross injustice has been meted out to the applicant as her full decree of divorce which clearly stated that the custody of the girl child (being minor) would be with the mother i.e., the applicant. This caused severe prejudice to her as she was denied the opportunity to fill in her choice postings for transfer on humanitarian and compassionate grounds of being a single mother. We think that this wrong would be corrected and that ends of justice would be met if this case is remanded back to the Respondent no. 4 - Principal, KV, Mathura Refinery, Mathura with a direction to withdraw the employee profile dated 31.03.2025 issued under his signature qua the applicant and upload/revise the status of the applicant as 'Single 16 OA No. 1526/2025 Item 16 (C-3) Parent' in the Portal (PIMS) within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The respondents are further directed to allow the applicant to fill her online choices in the transfer portal of KVS as per transfer policy for single parents and consider transferring/posting the applicant in any of her choice posting either immediately or in the next transfer/posting cycle. This exercise should be completed within a period of two months from the date of uploading/amending the status of the applicant as Single Parent.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending M.A if any also stands disposed of accordingly.
(Dr. Sumeet Jerath) (Harvinder Kaur Oberoi)
Member (A) Member (J)
/Mbt/