Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
AJAY BHANOT,J.
Ashwani Kumar Srivastava – Appellant
Versus
Central Bank Of India Through Its Managing Director, Chandennukhi, Nariman Point , Mumbai – Respondent
WRIT - A No. - 52 of 2025
Decided on : 03-03-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges a transfer order. (Para 2) |
| 2. petitioner argues transfer violates disability act. (Para 3) |
| 3. respondent defends transfer as necessary for service. (Para 4) |
| 4. petitioner’s background and family disability status. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 5. disabilities act aims to empower persons with disabilities. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 6. definitions of benchmark disability and disability under the act. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 7. caregivers defined and their role recognized. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 8. importance of caregivers in supporting persons with disabilities. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 9. legal provisions on reasonable accommodation for disabilities. (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 10. non-discrimination in employment and transfer policies. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 11. government memorandum on transfer exemptions for caregivers. (Para 23 , 24) |
| 12. transfer as an incident of service. (Para 25) |
| 13. balancing caregiver rights and institutional interests. (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 14. limits of reasonable accommodation for caregivers. (Para 29 , 30) |
| 15. legislative standard for reasonable accommodation. (Para 31 , 32) |
| 16. flexibility in policy for caregivers under disabilities act. (Para 33 , 34) |
| 17. conditions for caregiver exemptions from transfers. (Para 35 , 36) |
| 18. no absolute ban on caregiver transfers due to institutional needs. (Para 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 19. balancing individual rights with institutional interests. (Para 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 20. factors to consider in transfer exemption requests. (Para 43 , 44) |
| 21. bank's assessment of transfer request and disability. (Para 45 , 46 , 47) |
| 22. court finds no violation of transfer policy. (Para 48 , 49 , 50) |
| 23. writ petition dismissed; no infirmity in transfer order. (Para 51 , 52 , 53 , 54) |
| 24. call for policy development for caregivers. (Para 55 , 56) |
1. The judgement is being structured in the following conceptual framework to facilitate the discussion:
| I | Introduction | ||||||||
| II | Submissions of learned counsels for the parties | ||||||||
| III | Facts | ||||||||
| IV | Statutory Framework/Legal Provisions
| ||||||||
| V | Rights of care givers and obligations of employers in light of interplay of applicable statutory scheme and legal provisions | ||||||||
| VI | Conclusions |
I. Introduction
2. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 06.05.2024 passed by the respondent no. 4 transferring the petitioner from Raniganj Branch, District Pratapgarh (Varanasi Region) to the Central Bank of India, Regional Office, Rajkot.
II. Submissions of learned counsel for the parties:
3. Shri Ritesh Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing the impugned transfer order submits as follows:
I. The petitioner is the care giver of his wife who is a person suffering from disability under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016[Hereinafter referred to as the Disabilities Act, 2016]
II. The impugned order is violative of the mandate of the Disabilities Act, 2016. Attention is called to various provisions of the Disabilities Act, 2016.
III. The impugned order of transfer is in the teeth of the Office Memorandum dated 08.10.2018 issued by Government of India, Bank Circular dated 28.06.2022 and transfer policy of the Bank dated 15.03.2024.
IV. The petitioner is entitled to exemption from transfer under the aforesaid provisions of the Disabilities Act, 2016, Office Memorandum dated 08.10.2018 issued by Government of India, Bank Circular dated 28.06.2022 and transfer policy of the Bank dated 15.03.2024.
V. The mother of the petitioner is also suffering from a disability under the Disabilities Act, 2016.
VI. The impugned order suffers from non application of mind and was passed as a matter of routine.
Submissions on behalf of respondents
4. Shri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Gyan Prakash, learned counsel for the respondent Bank defended the impugned order by contending as under:
I. Transfer is an incident of service. The office memorandum of the Government of India do n
The court emphasized that while the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act protects care givers, transfers are essential for institutional efficiency and must balance individual rights with organiza....
The court established that the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act mandates reasonable accommodation for caregivers, prioritizing the welfare of disabled dependents in employment decisions.
Caregiver exemption from transfer for benchmark mental disability applies despite disability pension, emphasizing physical/emotional dependency over financial; policy violation warrants quashing tran....
Transfer of caregiver to disabled child invalid if violates RPWD Act rights to dignity, rehabilitation and DoP&T guidelines; local policies subordinate; sympathetic posting near medical facilities ma....
Transfer policies must accommodate employees who are caregivers for differently abled children, ensuring their welfare is prioritized during administrative actions.
Caregiver exemption from transfer policy applies for specified disabilities like Multiple Sclerosis, overriding long stay and own-request transfers upon proper representation.
Transfer is incident of service; no vested right to implementation if cancelled for valid administrative reasons like unauthorized absence; compassionate transfer needs certified disability proof; no....
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
