Transfer of an employee often creates trouble both in the professional and personal life of such employee if due to such transfer one has to move to another city. Settling in a new city is difficult if an employee has to tag along his family members with him especially spouse and children. Practically it is harsh for the children as it is difficult to get admission in school during the middle of a session. Even though some companies compensate their employees with relocation benefits, it is not the financial constraint that always creates hindrances. However, the company on the other hand for its own benefit has to take the decision of transferring an employee from one place to another, which often upsets such employee. He can often show reluctance to such transfer. Is such transfer valid it is in the eye of law?
The power to transfer an employee for place A to place B remains in the hands of the employer. It is up to the employer to decide who, when and where to be transferred for the betterment of the company. As long as such transfer is done in terms of the appointment letter and/ or standing order, then it will be considered legal and under such circumstances no local courts would have the jurisdiction to interfere with such transfer. Even trade union leaders are transferred from one place to another which cannot be said an act of victimization directly. Trade union is engaged in the activities of welfare of the employees and not related to the activities of the management. Hence, it has been held by Rajasthan High Court in Kishori Lal Verma vs. Hindustan Zinc Ltd & Anr that transfer is a condition of service which is to be followed by every employee unless it is done with an intention of victimization; which on the other hand is very difficult to prove.