Judicial review of transfer orders is limited; transfers made without mala fides and within policy guidelines are valid even if completed shortly before the normal retention period.

JUDGMENT :

ANJAN MONI KALITA, J.

Heard Mr. D. Deka, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. N. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. M. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent bank.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner assailing the order dated 21.06.2025 issued by the Respondent No. 3, whereby the Petitioner is transferred from the Guwahati Zonal office to the UCO Bank Main Office, Fancy Bazaar, Guwahati.

3. The Petitioner has been serving as a Scale-III officer in the Respondent Bank and was posted at the Zonal Office at Silpukhuri, Guwahati. The Petitioner is also a member of the All India UCO Bank Officers’ Federation (AIUCBOF), which is the central union of the officers’ of the bank. The Petitioner is also a member of the UCO Bank Officers’ Association, NER, wherein the Petitioner holds the office of the Joint General Secretary.

4. It is stated that the Transfer Policy to be adopted for the transfers for the year 2025-26 was initially notified on 29.10.2024. However, on 29.03.2025, the Respondent Bank notified another Transfer Policy after the approval of the Board of Directors. Clause 20.9 of the Transfer Policy dated 29.03.2025 provides for transfer protection/exemption to certain office bearers of recognized Unions/Associations of the Bank. On 03.05.2025, the Respondent No.2 issued an order laying down the “action points” for carrying out the annual transfer exercise. As per clause 3, under the heading of “transfer instructions for Zonal Heads/Department Heads at HO” stipulates that intra-zone transfer exercises, including reporting of officers at new places of posting, should be completed within 12.05.2025. On 18.06.2025, the Respondent No. 2 issued an Advisory on Posting of Union Office Bearers in Zonal Offices (herein after referred to as “Advisory”) wherein it was, inter alia, advised that the Office Bearers in the Unions/Associations should not be posted in zonal/controlling/monitoring offices, avoid placing in sensitive areas of HR functions, i.e., HRM, PSD and Vigilance. It also advised the Zonal Offices to carry out a review of manpower and do the necessary compliance of the Advisory so issued. On 21.06.2025, the Respondent No.3 issued an order whereby the Petitioner was transferred from the Zonal Office to UCO Bank Main Branch, Fancy Bazaar, Guwahati.

5. It is the case of the Petitioner that the order of his transfer is in total violation of the Transfer Policy issued by the Respondent bank. It is also contended by the Petitioner that the act of the Respondent No.2 in issuing the Advisory dated 18.06.2025 to review manpower in order to pick and choose employees on the basis of their involvement in recognized Unions and Associations and thereafter, directing to transfer such employees, including the Petitioner, is in violation of the existing Transfer Policy of the Respondent bank.

6. The Respondent bank has contested the case by filing an Affidavit-in-Opposition to which an Affidavit-in- Reply has also been filed by the Petitioner. An Additional Affidavit has also been filed by the Petitioner to bring on record certain facts alleging harassment by the Respondent Bank to the Petitioner after the impugned order of transfer was stayed by this Court, vide an interim order dated 27.06.2025.

7. Mr. D. Deka, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, submits that the Transfer Policy, which is holding the field presently, was notified on 29.03.2025 after the due approval of the Board of Directors of the Respondent bank. These are comprehensive guidelines which covers all the employees of the Respondent bank in the event of their transfers. He submits that the existence of a detailed transfer policy indicates a transfer in the Respondent bank has to be affected only as per the policy so professed. He submits that the Transfer Policy