Employee can’t insist on transfer to particular place, it’s for employer to decide: Supreme Court


New Delhi: The Supreme Court has observed that an employee cannot insist on a transfer to a particular place and it is for the employer to shift the staff considering the requirement. The top court made this observation while dismissing the petition of a lecturer challenging the Allahabad High Court’s October 2017 order.

In its September 6 order, the apex court bench of justices M R Shah and Aniruddha Bose said, “It is not for the employee to insist to transfer him/her and/or not to transfer him/her at a particular place. It is for the employer to transfer an employee considering the requirement.”

Earlier, the Allahabad High Court had dismissed the lecturer’s plea against the rejection of her representation by the authority concerned for transfer from Amroha to Gautam Buddha Nagar. 

The woman, who was posted as a lecturer in Amroha district, had said that she had made a representation for her transfer to a college at Gautam Buddha Nagar and it was rejected in September 2017 by the authority.

Namrata Verma’s counsel had argued before the high court in 2017 that she was working at Amroha for the last four years and under the government policy, she was entitled to a transfer.

The high court had noted that the order passed by the authority concerned showed that she had remained posted at a college at Gautam Buddha Nagar for about 13 years from the date of her initial appointment in December 2000 to August 2013 and, therefore, her request for posting her again at the same institution was not justified.

The high court had ordered that the petitioner was not entitled to be posted at a place where she had already worked at a stretch for about 13 years.

The court had also directed that that in case the petitioner has completed the requisite number of years at the place of her present posting, she may request for transfer to some other place but not to a place where she had already worked for 13 years. 

Notably, senior Advocate, Parvez Bashista had appeared for the petitioner in the Supreme Court while Advocate Sanjay Kumar Tyagi had appeared for the state of Uttar Pradesh.

(With Agency Inputs)



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *