$~72 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4122/2026 MANISHA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kanishk Arora, Ms. Shakshi Goyal, Ms. Nidhi Vardhan, Mr. Ujjwal, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ripudaman Bhardwaj CGSC with Mr. Amit Kumar Rana, Advocate. Mr Davinder Singh Dy. JAG ITBP CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN O R D E R % 06.04.2026 1. Through the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner essentially assails the correctness of office order dated 16.02.2026, by which the Petitioner’s family accommodation has been cancelled and she has been directed to shift to Mahila Barracks. 2. We have heard the learned counsel representing the parties at length. 3. The learned counsel representing the Petitioner has submitted that the allotment of family accommodation has been cancelled without giving a show cause notice and the Petitioner is admittedly married. It is submitted that that for cancellation of allotment, proper procedure has not been followed. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/04/2026 at 12:23:59 4. Per contra, the learned counsel representing the Respondents has submitted that the Petitioner is not staying with her family at the allotted family accommodation. It is submitted that even during the pendency of the writ petition, the Petitioner has been granted two opportunities of personal hearing. 5. On a query made by the Court, the learned counsel representing the Petitioner admits that the Petitioner is by and large staying alone except occasional visit by her family members. 6. The allotted accommodation is a family accommodation and when the Respondents carried out a surprise inspection, the Petitioner was found to be residing all alone. 7. As noted above, the Petitioner has not disputed that during the duration of 1.5 years, her family members have not stayed with her and they have been occasionally visiting her. 8. It is pointed out that in the hearing dated 23.03.2026, it has been recorded that whenever the Petitioner brings her mother, she can further submit a fresh application for allotment of family accommodation, which shall be considered. 9. Keeping in view the aforesaid position, no ground is made out to exercise the writ jurisdiction. 10. However, in the peculiar facts of the case, the Petitioner is granted two weeks time to vacate the family accommodation. 11. The writ petition stands dismissed. ANIL KSHETARPAL, J AMIT MAHAJAN, J APRIL 6, 2026/DU This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/04/2026 at 12:23:59