Frequent transfers contravene established transfer policies and may constitute harassment, requiring reconsideration of grievances while emphasizing the importance of a conducive work environment.

JUDGMENT :

SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

1. Heard Mr. Vivek Kumar Shukla and Ms. Shweta Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Asit Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Gopal Kumar Srivastava and Mr. Akash Deep Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 to 5 and Mr. Varun Pandey, learned counsel for the Union of India.

2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the transfer order dated 18.7.2025 issued by the Corporate Office, HRM, Indian Bank which is communicated by Assistant General Manager, HRM, Indian Bank. Further prayer is made for quashing of the order dated 4.10.2025 passed by the Grievance Redressal Authority and the order dated 10.11.2025 passed by the appellate authority alongwith the order dated 5.8.2025, by which the petitioner is relieved.

3. He submitted that against the transfer order, the petitioner moved a letter on 21.7.2025 before the Grievance Redressal Cell and, when that remained unheard, within a period 15 days, he filed a writ petition bearing Writ-A No. 9921 of 2025 wherein this Court was pleased to pass the order on 1.9.2025, which is quoted hereinunder:-

"1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Arvind Kumar, learned counsel, who files memo on behalf of respondent no.1, and Sri Gopal Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for respondents no.2 and 3.

2. With the consent of learned counsels for the parties the matter is being decided finally.

3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the transfer order dated 18.07.2025, a copy of which is Annexure-1 to the petition, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Bahraich to Salem.

4. It has also been pointed out by Sri Srivastava that the petitioner has already been relieved on 05.08.2025. He also states that as the petitioner has been relieved as such his entire matter now would be considered by the competent authority where the petitioner has been transferred.

5. Various grounds have been taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner to challenge the said order.

6. However, it has been pointed out that in terms of Clause 26 of the Transfer Policy for Officers up to scale III issued by the Indian Bank, a copy of which is Annexure-5 to the petition, the petitioner can raise his grievance before the Zonal Officer/FGMO Corporate Office and that the petitioner has already raised his grievance vide grievance dated 21.07.2025, a copy of which is Annexure-4 to the petition. As such, it is prayed that the said grievance be directed to be decided by the competent authority who is said to be respondents no.2 and 3.

7. Accordingly, considering Clause 26 of the Transfer Policy the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and dispose of the grievance as raised by the petitioner, a copy of which is Annexure-4 to the petition, in accordance with law and relevant rules which grievance would be decided within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

8. Till then no coercive action has been taken against the petitioner in pursuance to the impugned transfer order dated 18.07.2025."

4. Further submission is that vide the aforesaid order, the competent authority of the Bank was directed to consider the grievance of the petitioner as per clause 26 of the transfer policy and it was also provided that till the decision is taken no coercive action shall be taken against him. He submitted that in compliance of the order aforesaid, the order dated 8.9.2025 has been passed but the grievance of the petitioner has not been redressed and the request of the petitioner has been