In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has set aside the transfer orders of three officers from Indian Overseas Bank (IOB), terming the moves as punitive actions taken in lieu of disciplinary measures. The case involved Bubu K.V., Vineeth Chelekkat, and Prabin N., all of whom had been abruptly transferred to distant locations after raising concerns over operational issues within the bank.
The court, presided over by Justice Murali Purushothaman, ruled that the transfers were carried out following allegations of insubordination against the officers. However, instead of following proper disciplinary procedures, the bank had opted to relocate the officers to distant branches, including the Regional Office in Guwahati.
Background of the Case
The issue started when Bubu K.V., an Assistant Manager at the Kozhikode Main Branch, voiced concerns during a review meeting about the bank’s handling of UPI (Unified Payments Interface) transactions. According to Bubu, the problems with UPI payments were affecting customer retention and acquisition at the branch level. His comments were intended to improve branch performance, but the bank’s management, particularly the Chief Regional Manager, perceived his remarks as insubordination.
On the same day as the review meeting, Bubu was issued a show cause notice, accusing him of arguing with the Chief Regional Manager and not being prepared for the review. Despite Bubu’s explanation that he was merely making constructive suggestions, the bank ordered his immediate transfer to Guwahati—one of the farthest locations from his current posting.
The Court’s Observations
The court found that the transfer was clearly punitive. Justice Purushothaman noted that the sequence of events following the review meeting pointed to the transfer being used as a disciplinary measure without following due process. The court referred to similar cases where transfers were misused as a tool for punishment, reiterating that any such action must be backed by a formal inquiry or disciplinary proceedings.
The court also highlighted that transferring Bubu to such a distant location had a severe impact on his family life, which included his aged parents and young child. The transfer, the court observed, could not be justified as being necessary for administrative reasons, as claimed by the bank.
Broader Impact on Other Officers
Vineeth Chelekkat and Prabin N., who had shown solidarity with Bubu by posting messages in the bank’s official WhatsApp group, were also issued transfer orders. These officers had expressed their concern over Bubu’s treatment, stating that his points in the meeting reflected genuine operational issues faced by field officers. Like Bubu, both were transferred to far-off locations—Lucknow and Berhampur, Odisha—shortly after their messages were posted.
The court ruled that their transfers were similarly punitive and noted that no proper reasons had been given for these relocations. The bank’s argument that the WhatsApp messages encouraged defiance was not upheld by the court, which found that the officers had simply raised legitimate concerns.
The Verdict
The court quashed all the transfer orders, stating that they were issued as punishment and not due to any administrative necessity. The ruling emphasized that transfer orders cannot be used as a tool for retribution and that employees must be given the opportunity to address any allegations of misconduct through proper disciplinary channels.
The court has also allowed the bank to continue its internal inquiry into the allegations of insubordination if it chooses to do so, but it made clear that any such process must follow the established procedures and not be disguised as a punitive transfer.
This ruling reinforces the rights of employees to raise concerns without fear of retaliation and stresses the importance of transparency and fairness in administrative actions.
