(1.) PETITIONER is a Senior Manager of MMG Scale -Ill in Punjab National Bank. She has come to this Court against her transfer order. She has been transferred from Patna Circle to Muzaffarpur Circle. She states that ordinarily she is also aware that transfer being an incidence of service, cannot be objected to, but in the present case she alleges mala fide and hostile discrimination. Here allegations of mala fide are that her transfer had been actuated on basis of a complaint. This complaint in spite of repeated request were never disclosed to her. Here allegation with regard to hostile discrimination is that there are other senior employees of the Banks who have been in one circle at Patna itself for a period, much longer than the petitioner, some for 25 years, yet they have not been touched nor are intended to touched though on basis of the same Rules and Regulations she is being transferred.
(2.) BANK has filed a counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit the stand was taken that the transfer is not because of any complaint but purely on administrative ground. Petitioner had been at Patna for over 20 years. As per Bank service rule, she could not stay in one Circle for more than 7 years. She can thus make no grievance. In the counter affidavit, Annexure -B, has been appended, that is an internal letter from Human Resources Development Division, Head Office, New Delhi, dated 3.12.2008 to the Circle Office at Patna. That itself clearly discloses that indeed there was a complaint against the petitioner and the exercise started pursuant thereto. Regrettably, neither was the complaint discussed or disclosed in the counter affidavit nor any reference was at all made. At that stage, this Court, by a detailed order dated 7.12.2009, directed the Bank to bring on record and produce the original file in relation to the complaint, as referred in Annexure -B and proceedings in relation thereto. The original records have been produced. These records clearly show that there were a spate of similar anonymous complaints to the Central Vigilance Organization of the Bank at New Delhi against the petitioner.
(3.) A reference to the said complaints would show that the complaints were making an issue with regard to petitioner 'soverstay in a particular circle for a longer period, which gives rise to corrupt practice though no specific incident with detail was mentioned.