'Can't Behave This Way': Punjab & Haryana High Court Pulls Up Nationalised Bank For Transferring New Mother Away From Husband's Workplace

Observing that bank "is not supposed to behave in the manner in which they have behaved with a married woman having child of few months", the Punjab & Haryana High Court has pulled up the Bank of India for transferring its employee away from husband's workplace, in violation of its policy and then refusing to accept her resignation.

Chandni, a General manager of the bank in Chandigarh, was transferred to Rajkot, Gujarat while she was on a sick leave. She had a few months old child and her husband was based in Chandigarh. Expressing her inability to join the duty at Rajkot, she had submitted her resignation. However, the resignation was rejected and she was asked to join the duty at Rajkot and then resign. Thereafter, the bank initiated department enquiry for being absent from duty. 

Justice Jagmohan Bansal said that, "the approach adopted by the bank seems to be harsh, pedantic and highly technical. It appears that the authorities have acted in a very mechanical and ruthless manner. The conduct of the officials dealing with this matter needs to be deprecated. The respondent- bank is not supposed to behave in the manner in which they have behaved with a married woman having child of few months."

The Court further added that the petitioner offered resignation because it was impossible for her to join at Rajkot. "The stand of the respondents is that petitioner was required to join at Rajkot prior to filing resignation is totally baseless when it could be accepted by Head Office."

The woman had approached the Court seeking directions to the bank to accept the resignation. Her counsel argued that on account of her ill-health and having child of few months, she could not join at Rajkot and repeatedly requested the respondents to cancel transfer order. It was further added that in terms of para 2.5 of the transfer policy, a married woman shall be placed at the working place of the husband or nearby.

On the other hand, the counsel for the Bank argued that the petitioner has not submitted resignation letter at Rajkot, thus, her resignation could not be accepted.

Considering the submissions the Court said, "It is undisputed fact that the respondent-bank is a nationalised bank having its branches across the country. It is not a case that the petitioner has been shifted from one authority/department to another authority/department whereas it is a case where the petitioner has been transferred from one branch to another branch of the same bank."

The Court remarked, "It is well known fact that in our country, it is very difficult to get Government job, thus, it cannot be accepted that anyone is going to resign at his/her own free will."

The bench further opined that the petitioner was transferred "ignoring the fact that she is a married woman, her husband is working at Chandigarh and she had delivered a child few months back prior to the date of transfer."

Perusing the transfer policy Justice Bansal said, "Paragraph 2.5 of the Policy specifically provides that a married woman shall be placed at the working place of the husband or nearby to that place."

"The respondents firstly in violation of its Policy transferred the petitioner from Chandigarh to Rajkot and adding to the woes did not accept her resignation,"it added.

In the light of the above, the Court granted the relief with the direction to the Bank to consider application of the petitioner seeking resignation and pass fresh order within two weeks, ignoring her non-joining at Rajkot.

Counsel for the petitioner: Ramesh Kumar

Counsel for the respondents: R.N.Lohan and Anas Ahmed