Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ANJAN MONI KALITA
Rishiraj Dass, Son of Late Kiron Das – Appellant
Versus
UCO Bank, represented by its Managing Director cum CEO. – Respondent
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 Po
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.
The Transfer Policy for lady officers allows for transfers within the same zone without invoking the three-year tenure requirement, as this applies only to inter-zonal transfers.
Transfer policies are directory, not mandatory, and courts will not interfere unless there is clear malafide or statutory violation.
The authority to transfer employees lies with designated officials per company policy, and such transfers can only be challenged on grounds of mala fides or policy violation.
Frequent transfers contravene established transfer policies and may constitute harassment, requiring reconsideration of grievances while emphasizing the importance of a conducive work environment.
The court ruled that transfer orders are administrative decisions and can only be interfered with if proven mala fide or in violation of statutory provisions.
Management has the discretion to transfer employees based on organizational needs, and courts cannot interfere in such administrative decisions unless there is a clear violation of policy.
Transfer orders within a corporation are valid administrative actions and do not require statutory regulations, affirming the limited scope of judicial review in such matters.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
