Neena .K.I v. The Deputy General Manager
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.05.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.10689 & 10699 of 2025 Neena K.I.
... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Deputy General Manager, Human Resource Management Department, Indian Overseas Bank, Central Office, P.B.No.3765, 763, Anna Salai, Chennai-6000002.
2.The Chief Manager, Nagercoil Regional Office, Indian Overseas Bank, NO.552/1, 1st Floor, M.S. Road, Vetrunnimadam, Nagercoil, Kanyakumar District.
... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for records relating to the impugned order made by the first respondent in HRMD/SUP/GEN1/5
LAW/9/2025-26, dated 25.04.2025 and the consequential order made by the second respondent in RO/HRMD/SUP/TRF-38803 dated 03.05.2025 and quash the same as illegal.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff For Respondents : Mr.N.Dilipkumar
ORDER
The present writ petition has been filed by the Senior Law Manager of the respondent bank challenging the order of transfer from Nagercoil to Central Office at Chennai.
2. According to the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, the petitioner is undergoing treatment for cancer at Ernakulam and therefore, she requires to be accommodated in a nearby place. He further submits that the petitioner being a Senior Law Manager, an order of transfer is to be passed only by the General Manager. The present impugned order having been passed by the Deputy General Manager is without jurisdiction. He further submits that she does not fall within the category of business administrative officer and 2/5
therefore, the question of considering herself as transferring on the ground of business exigency would not arise.
3. Per contra, the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submitted that the petitioner is working in the Nagercoil Region and in the nearby region for more than 15 years and only due to administrative reasons, she has been transferred. He further submits that the petitioner at her request has been accommodated between Thiruvananthapuram and Nagercoil on various occasions. Only due to the seniority of the petitioner, her presence is required in the Central Office at Chennai. He further submitted that the order of transfer was approved by the General Manager only thereafter, the present impugned communication has been issued by the Deputy General Manager.
4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the order impugned in the writ petition does not warrant any interference. However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that she requires three months time to complete her medical requirements and settle the family so as to move to Chennai.
3/5
5. Considering the above said facts, this Court is inclined to pass the following order:- (I) The petitioner shall file an affidavit on or before 15.06.2025 to the first respondent that she would move to the Central Office, Chennai from 01.09.2025 onwards.
(II) On filing of such undertaking affidavit, the petitioner shall not be disturbed from Nagercoil till 31.08.2025.
6. The Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 22.05.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes rmi R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.
4/5
rmi 22.05.2025 5/5