In a recent judgment, the Bombay High Court criticized the Indian Overseas Bank for refusing an employee's plea to revert her promotion and transfer her back to Mumbai, enabling her to care for her 10-year-old visually impaired child. The court emphasized the necessity of human sensitivity in administrative decisions, especially when they intersect with personal and familial obligations.
The petitioner, initially serving as a Clerk at the bank's Mumbai branch, was promoted to Assistant Manager in Chennai. Cognizant of her child's special needs, she expressed willingness to forgo the promotion if allowed to remain in Mumbai. Her child, with a 95% visual impairment, required consistent care and a stable environment, which she believed would be disrupted by relocating to Chennai.
Initially, the bank indicated a willingness to consider her request. However, it later reversed its position, citing the absence of a policy permitting reversal of promotions. The bank's counsel argued that since the petitioner had undertaken multiple examinations to earn the promotion, she was obligated to accept it. They further contended that Chennai, being a metropolitan city, would offer adequate facilities for her child's needs.
The court found this reasoning unconvincing, asserting that a mother is best positioned to determine her child's welfare. The judges noted that uprooting the child from a familiar environment could pose significant challenges, especially given his disability. They highlighted that the bank failed to demonstrate any administrative difficulties in accommodating the petitioner's request, suggesting that another employee could fill the Chennai position. The court remarked, "We are not told about any administrative difficulty in permitting to do so, as the bank would find some other employee to fill up the said promotional post of the Assistant Manager in Chennai, but a child may not find a substitute for mother."
The court criticized the bank's rigid adherence to policy, stating that such an inflexible approach lacks human sensitivity. They emphasized that policies should serve as guidelines and should not override considerations of compassion and practicality. The judges expressed disappointment that the bank's stance forced the petitioner to seek judicial intervention for a matter that could have been resolved internally with empathy.
In conclusion, the court allowed the petitioner's request to revert to her original position in Mumbai and imposed a cost of ₹25,000 on the bank. This judgment underscores the importance of balancing organizational policies with humane considerations, especially when employees face personal challenges. It serves as a reminder that institutions should exercise flexibility and compassion, ensuring that policies do not become impediments to justice and human welfare.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.