Back
SHREE PRAKASH SINGH
Kavita Giri – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Shree Prakash Singh, J.
1. Heard Dr. L.P. Mishra, Advocate assisted by Sri Asit Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sanjay Bhasin, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Anand Kumar Singh, for the opposite parties No. 2 to 6. No one is present for the Union of India.
2. This matter is being decided finally at admission stage on the consent of counsels for both the parties.
3. Under challenge is the order dated 4.11.2023, passed by the General Manager (HRM), Bank of Baroda i.e. opposite party No. 6 as well as the order dated 9.6.2023 passed by the Regional Head, Bank of Baroda, which are said to be passed in utter violation of the order dated 13.7.2023, by this Court in Special Appeal No. 347 of 2023 and against the transfer policy, particularly, with respect to the lady officers of the respondent Bank.
4. Factual matrix of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed on 26.11.2008, on the post of Probationary Clerk, in Vijaya Bank, which was subsequently merged into Bank of Baroda and she joined in the office at district-Lucknow. Thereafter, in the year, 2012, she was promoted on the post of Assistant Manager in the office at Gomti Nagar, Luckn
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.
Frequent transfers contravene established transfer policies and may constitute harassment, requiring reconsideration of grievances while emphasizing the importance of a conducive work environment.
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.
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.
Transfer policies are directory, not mandatory, and courts will not interfere unless there is clear malafide or statutory violation.
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.
The spouse ground for transfer can only be utilized once in a ten-year block, and the petitioner had already availed this benefit, thus the transfer was upheld.
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
