Employee can't insist on transfer to particular place, rules top court

The apex court observed this while dismissing a petition by a lecturer challenging a October 2017 order of the Allahabad High Court

SUPREME COURT
Press Trust of India New Delhi
2 min read Last Updated : Sep 12 2021 | 3:32 PM IST

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 Supreme Court has said.

The apex court observed this while dismissing a petition by a lecturer challenging a October 2017 order of the Allahabad High Court.

The high court had dismissed her plea against the rejection of her representation by the authority concerned for transfer from Amroha to Gautam Buddha Nagar.

"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, an apex court bench of justices M R Shah and Aniruddha Bose said in its September 6 order.

In her petition filed in the high court, 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.

Her 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.

In its order, the high court had said the petitioner was not entitled to be posted at a place where she had already worked at a stretch for about 13 years.

The high court had said 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.

(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

Topics :Supreme Courtjobs and employees

First Published: Sep 12 2021 | 3:32 PM IST

Next Story