The Bank Promoted Him. Then It Moved Him 1,000 km Away From His Sick Brother.
What the Rajasthan High Court said when a UCO Bank manager had to go to court to get his own bank's policy followed.
This UCO Bank transfer case starts at home. A UCO Bank manager takes care of his younger brother.
His brother has thalassemia and a 75% permanent disability. He needs a blood transfusion every 15 to 20 days. The manager is his primary caregiver.
Then the bank promoted him from Scale I to Scale II.
For most of us, a promotion is good news. For him, it came with a transfer to a branch about 1,000 km away.
I was posted in Sonipat, Rajkot and Kurukshetra during my years at PNB. I know what a transfer order does to a household. If you have felt that fear yourself, you will relate to The Hidden Reality of Working in a Rural Bank Branch.
He asked the bank to reconsider. The bank rejected his representation on 8 September 2026.
So he went to the Rajasthan High Court.
What the bank said
Under the transfer policy for officers, a promotion from Scale I to Scale II means a transfer. The bank said there was no malice and that the order was made for administrative reasons.
What the court said about the UCO Bank transfer
The Jaipur bench of the Rajasthan High Court (Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18831/2026) set the transfer aside. Here are the main points from the reported order.
- The bank had applied its general transfer policy mechanically. The court called it a non-speaking order, which means it never explained why the manager's circumstances didn't matter.
- The bank has its own Equal Opportunity Policy. Clause 7 exempts employees who care for a dependent with a disability of 40% or more from routine transfers. The brother's dependency was already recorded in the bank's HR records.
- The court said the policy was framed under Section 21 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. It called the policy a statutory obligation, not an act of charity. A bank can't frame a policy for display and then act against it.
- When two policies pull in different directions, the special policy for caregivers prevails over the general transfer policy.
- "Administrative constraints" can't be an open-ended excuse. If a bank wants to depart from the exemption, it needs genuine and demonstrable administrative reasons.
The court also noted that the brother's survival would be at risk if the manager were moved so far away. It directed the bank to let him continue at his present posting.
What this order does not mean
It doesn't give the manager lifelong protection from transfers. The court said transfer remains an administrative need. His protection is that the bank must consider his case under the special policy, and any posting must be somewhere his brother can get adequate medical care.
What a banker in a similar situation can do
This is general information, not legal advice. Every case depends on its own facts.
- Get a written copy of your bank's transfer policy and its Equal Opportunity Policy, or any similar welfare policy. Read the clause that covers you.
- Check that your dependent's disability and your role as caregiver are recorded in your HR records. In this case, that record mattered.
- Make your representation in writing, cite the specific clause, and keep a copy with an acknowledgement.
- If the bank rejects it, ask for a reasoned order. A rejection with no reasons is exactly what the court criticised here.
- Talk to your union or a lawyer early, before joining dates and deadlines pass.
Also this month: an SBI officer's medical absence
The Patna High Court (Justice Harish Kumar, CWJC No. 8579 of 2020) quashed notices that treated an SBI officer with over 30 years of service as having voluntarily vacated his post after a long medical absence.
The court said absence alone doesn't prove wilful absence, especially when medical records back it up, and that the bank never gave him a meaningful chance to explain. He gets no salary for the period he didn't work, but that period counts toward continuity of service.
One question
The rule existed. The employee fell inside it. And it still took a High Court to make the bank follow it.
How many bankers had a case like this and couldn't go to court? Share your experience in the Bankpediaa feed. You can post under your display name, and your bank and role stay private unless you choose to show them.
Sources: Rajasthan High Court order in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18831/2026, as reported by LiveLaw on 8 October 2026. Patna High Court order in CWJC No. 8579 of 2020, as reported by LiveLaw on 6 October 2026.
Written by
