AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
JYOTI SINGH, J. (ORAL)
Present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner for quashing and setting aside letter dated 06.10.2022 as also seekin g a direction to the Respondents to transfer the Petitioner to Delhi on compassionate ground, due to the ill health of her father.
It is the case of the Petitioner, who is currently working as Junior Management Grade Scale - I Officer with the Respondent Bank/State Bank of India that father of the Petitioner is suffering from Parkinson’s disease and requires constant care and attention. Petitioner has been posted to Bhagalpur Branch, Patna where she was required to join immediately. However, in view of the medical con dition of h er father, Petitioner requested for being transferred and posted t o Delhi Circle from Patna. Petitioner also submitted a detailed representation on 22.10.2022, requesting for transfer on compassionate grounds bu t no relief has been granted to her, compelling the Petitioner to approach this Court.
Mr. Rajiv Kapur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents submits that the representation of the Petitioner was rejected vide order dated 08.11.2022, copy of which has been placed on record and the rejection was duly communicated to t he Pet itioner by an email dated 08.11.2022.
It is further submitted that the case of t h e Pet itioner h as been considered but her request cannot be acceded to, in view of the policy of transfer embodied in the SBI Circular dated 26.07.2021, pertaining to inter-circle transfers. It is submitted that application for inter-circle transfer on ground of extreme compassion is generally considered for serious illness of parents only if the applicant is the sole child and parents are unable to re-locate to his/her place of posting for justifiable reasons. In the case of the Petitioner it is an adm itted position t hat Petitioner is not the sole child of her parents as she has a brother, which is evident from the particulars disclosed by the Petitioner pertaining to her family details and he is an earning member an d in a position to look after Petitioner’s father. It is u rged t hat Courts can only interfere in matters of transfer if the transfer is in violat ion of a policy or mala fide, which is not the case set up by the Petitioner.
I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
Relevant part of the circular dated 26.07.2021, pertaining to transfer on extreme compassionate ground relied upon by the Respondent Bank is as under:-
“1.The application of ICT under extreme compassionate ground can generally be considered for serious illness of self, spouse, parents (only if the applicant is the sole child and parents are unable to relocate to his/her place of posting for justifiable reasons), dependent children & sibling, and for employees who comes under PWD category. Any such personal/family circumstances, which warrants/necessitates transfer of the Officer may also be considered under Extreme Compassion subject to satisfactory verification of the same by recommending authority. Extreme Compassion cases on medical grounds should Invariably be referred to the Bank’s do ctor at respective LHO for their remarks.”
There is substance in the contention of t h e Respondent Ban k that the transfer policy envisages transfer on the ground of illn ess of the parents only if the applicant is the sole child and parents are unable to relocate to his/her place of posting. It is an adm itted posit ion t hat the Petitioner is not the sole child an d sh e h as a brot h er, wh o is an earning member and looking after the father. It is a settled law t hat in judicial review, Courts do not interfere in transfers made by the employer unless the same is contrary to the transfer policy or is mala fide and as rightly pointed by learned counsel for the Respondents neither of the two grounds have been set u p by t h e Pet itioner [Ref. Shilpi Bose (Mrs) and Others v. State of Bihar and Others, 1991 Supp (2) SCC 659].
At this stage, Mr. Kapur voluntarily offers that in case Petitioner desires to be transferred to any place within Patna, she m ay apply for the same and subject to availability h er requ est wou ld be considered.
Learned counsel for the Petitioner urges the Court to permit t he Petitioner to make another comprehensive representation annexing the medical documents as well as for a direction to Respondent Ban k t o consider the same sympathetically.
It is open to the Petitioner to make another representation along with the medical documents on the portal of the Bank, after sh e join s her current place of posting. Respondent Bank is at liberty to consider the representation, in accordance with law.
Petition is disposed of along with pending application, in t he aforesaid terms.