A KALIAPERUMAL Vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INVOKING the writ jurisdiction of this Court, the petitioner has come with this writ application seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the concerned records relating to the order of the third respondent dated 22. 5. 2004 bearing Ref. No. HRMD:vpa:2048:2004 and quashing the same insofar as it orders for transfer of the petitioner to Central Zone II, Bhopal of the respondent Bank as illegal, arbitrary, vindictive and in violation of transfer policy for officers of the respondent bank as communicated by the second respondent letter dated 20. 1. 2004 and consequently directing the respondent to retain the petitioner in Chennai region as per the transfer policy.

(2.) AFFIDAVIT in support of the application and counter affidavit are perused.

(3.) WHILE accepting the promotion, the petitioner has challenged only that part of the order, which relates to his transfer to bhopal, on the grounds that it is opposed to the transfer policy for the officers of the respondent bank, as per the communication of the second respondent dated 20. 1. 2004; that in view of the completion of four years of service outside Tamil Nadu, as per the transfer policy, the impugned order is arbitrary, mala fide and vindictive; that as many as five of the Officers are retained in Tamil Nadu eversince their date of recruitment, and they have not worked outside Tamil Nadu at all; that there are so many vacancies available within the State of Tamil Nadu; that some of them are being headed by the junior level Officers; that the wife of the petitioner is working in a government Higher Secondary School, Chothupakkam, Tamil Nadu; that the petitioner has to take care of his 75 years old mother, who is sick, and hence, the transfer order has got to be quashed.