Dismissed

Smt Ramya M.R. v. Bank of Maharashtra

Karnataka HC25 Sept 2021WA/239/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This intra-court appeal challenged a transfer order moving a Deputy Manager from Karnataka Zone to Bhopal Zone, allegedly violating the Bank's policy requiring transfers to adjacent zones. The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that while the policy prefers adjacent zones, officers have no statutory right to specific postings and the transfer was valid.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 was dismissed.

Smt Ramya M.R. Vs Bank of Maharashtra — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶8

WRIT APPEAL NO.239 OF 2021 (S-TR)

¶9

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO.24352 OF 2019 (S)

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

SMT RAMYA M.R. AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, DEPUTY MANAGER, BANK OF MAHARASHTRA, CHANDAPURA BRANCH, D/O MR.MOHANAN.T., R/AT NO.3/9-1, 1ST FLOOR, 3RD CROSS, SHAMANNA GARDEN, ADUGODI POST, BANGALORE-560 030. ...APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI REUBEN JACOB, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

BANK OF MAHARASHTRA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, HEAD OFFICE LOKAMANGAL 1501, SHIVAJINAGAR, PUNE-411 005.

¶16

¶17

BANK OF MAHARASHTRA REPRESENTED BY ITS

¶18

ASST. GENERAL MANAGER, HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT DEPT, LOKAMANGAL - 1501, SHIVAJINAGAR,

¶19

PUNE-411 005

¶20

BANK OF MAHARASHTRA BRANCH MANAGER, NO.271, LGGALUR VILLAGE, ANEKAL ROAD, CHANDAPURA, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE-560 081. .…RESPONDENTS

¶21

¶22

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 18/01/2021 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION NO. 24352/2019 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE APPELLANT.

¶23

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J ., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

This intra Court appeal under Section 4 of the

¶26

Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 18.01.2021 passed by learned Single Judge in writ petition no. 24352/ 2019 filed by the appellant in which the challenge made to the order dated 01.06.2019 transferring the

¶27

appellant from chandrapura, has been dismissed.

¶28

¶29

Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the appellant was appointed as Deputy Manager on 29.04.2013 and she was posted at various branches in Karnataka Zone with effect from 11.01.2017 and was posted to service branch in Basavanagudi, Bengaluru. Thereafter the appellant was transferred from Bengaluru to Hubli and on her request on 27.02.2018, the appellant was transferred to Bengaluru. The appellant had completed her tenure of six (6) years in Karnataka Zone, thereafter by order dated 1.6.2019 she was transferred from Karnataka Zone to Bhopal zone.

¶30

The appellant assailed the validity of the aforesaid order before the learned Single Judge, by way of writ proceeding. The learned Single Judge by order dated 18.1.2021 has disposed of the writ petition preferred by the appellant.

¶31

¶32

4. In the aforesaid factual aspects, this appeal

¶33

has been filed.

¶34

The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned single Judge should have appreciated that appellant is a scale-I Officer under the Bank of Maharashtra Officers' Transfer Policy, 2019 and could be transferred only to an adjacent Zone. However, the appellant has been transferred to Bhopal Zone. It is fairly pointed out in compliance of the order passed by the learned Single Judge, the appellant had submitted a representation which has been rejected by the Competent Authority on 12.03.2021. It is also pointed out that the appellant has challenged the aforesaid order in writ petition No.5814/2021 in which, interim order has been passed and the aforesaid writ petition is pending.

¶35

¶36

7. We have considered the submission made

¶37

by the learned counsel for the appellant and have perused the record.

¶38

Section 7(2) of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970, provides that general superintendence, direction and management of the affairs and business of a corresponding new bank, shall vest in a Board of Directors which shall be entitled to exercise all such powers.

¶39

Section 19(2) (d) of the Act empowers Board of Directors to frame regulations pertaining to conditions or limitations subject to which, the corresponding new bank may appoint advisers, officers or other employees.

¶40

The preamble of the Bank of Maharashtra Officers' Transfer Policy, 2019 reads as under:

¶41

¶42

1. Preamble

¶43

Officers' Service Regulations provide for categorization of posts and branches and placement of Officers in various grades in positions corresponding to their grade/scale in order to facilitate career growth, succession planning and developing competencies and ensuring efficient service to all constituents of the Bank.

¶44

In view of the above, periodic transfers, all Officers amongst branches and branch to administrative Officers and vice-versa, are necessary.

¶45

In the matter of placements and transfers, all Officers are governed by Regulation 47 of The Bank of Maharashtra (Officers') Service Regulations, 1979 (OSR) which states - "Every Officer is liable for transfer to any Office or Branch of the Bank or to any place in India".

¶46

The Transfer policy attempts to provide guidelines for transfer to officers in JMGS-I, MMGS-II and MMGS-III within the broad framework of the above mentioned Regulation and in order to provide a transparent system for deploying of Officers to meet the needs of business and exigencies of administration".

¶47

Section 5(b) & (d) of the policy, reads as

¶48

under:

¶49

Inter Zone Transfers

¶50

¶51

(a) Ordinarily and excepting those recruited/trained/promoted for specialized functions, officer in Junior Management Grade Scale-I will be transferred to Branches / Offices within a Zone, subject to a total tenure of 6 years within the zone. Thereafter, they will be posted to adjacent Zones/State, as the case may be.

¶52

(d) Officer in MMGS-II & III, who has completed 6 years continuous service in a Zone (including that under JMGS-I and/or MMGS-II) shall be transferred to another Zone, Such transfers would be on all India basis."

¶53

Thus, it is evident from the aforesaid

¶54

policy, that the transfer has not been done in violation of any statutory powers. Even under the policy, an Officer in Scale-I can be transferred to another Zone. However, clause 5(b) provides such a transfer as far as possible, be to the adjacent Zone, subject to condition mentioned in clause 4(h).

¶55

The appellant has no statutory right to

¶56

remain posted at particular place. The transfer is

¶57

¶58

an incident of service and the order of the transfer has neither been passed in violation of any statutory provision nor has been made with any malafide intention.

¶59

For the aforesaid view, we do not find any ground to interfere with the view taken by the learned Single Judge.

¶60

In the result, the appeal is hereby dismissed.

¶61

Sd/JUDGE

¶62

Sd/JUDGE

¶63

Smt Ramya M.R. v. Bank of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Ramya M.R. v. Bank of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Gadde Anajenya Devasthana Vs State of Karnataka

M/S. Yeshwanth Laxman Sable Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Yeshwanth Laxman Sable Vs the Government of Karnataka

Lakshmegowda Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer

Smt B M Ratnamma Vs Sri Uma Shankar

Dr Deepthi Bhava Vs Dr Ramakrishna Reddy