Standing orders
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 29 October 2011
This query is : Resolved
sir,transfer of an emploee from one place to another place can challange under standing orders act
Guest
(Expert) 29 October 2011
Not at all.
Transfer is a condition of service and the employer can post his employee anywhere within his jurisdiction.
However, if the employer transfers the employee to some entity other than the company of original employment that must be challenged, as the intention of the employer can be to deny terminal benefits of the employee on the original company of his employment.
Kiran Kumar
(Expert) 29 October 2011
no, even SC says the employer can transfer the employee as per the terms and conditions of the contract...
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 29 October 2011
BOTH EXPERTS HAVE RIGHTLY OPINED.An employer has right to transfer his employee in which court would not interfere.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 29 October 2011
I have never heard about Standing Order Act meant for transfers of employees. Can you please provide me its link?
Much has already been discussed about policy of rransfers.
Shonee Kapoor
(Expert) 29 October 2011
Even I am unaware and would like to learn more.
Regards,
Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 30 October 2011
16. But, even assuming that Clause 8(b) is valid, the employers had no right to transfer the petitioner-workmen from its factory in Moghalsarai to its office at Kanpur. Clause 8(b) confers power on the employers and its manager to change the shifts of workmen or transfer them from one job to another and transfer them from one shift to another and from one factory to another. Thus, even under Clause 8(b), a workman employed in the factory at Moghalsarai is liable to be transferred to another factory of the employers. The petitioners Nos. 2 to 12 have, however, not been transferred from Moghalsarai to any other factory of the employers, instead they have been transferred to the head office at Kanpur. Ex facie Clause 8(b) does not empower the employers to transfer any workman from the factory at Moghalsarai to its head office at Kanpur. The impugned transfer made by the employers were outside the scope of Clause 8(b) of the standing orders. The employers have failed to give any reasonable explanation for this transfer. In the circumstances, there is no escape from the conclusion that petitioners Nos. 2 to 11 were transferred to Kanpur on extraneous considerations with a view to victimise them
Guest
(Expert) 30 October 2011
Dear Author,
The new post of your own states, "Clause 8(b) confers power on the employers and its manager from one factory to another," so it is not understood what is the type of your confusion?
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 01 November 2011
sir my confusion is transfer matter not mentioned in the schedule to act1946.In Rohtak and Hissar Electric Supply Co. v. State of Uttar Pradesh 1966 II L.L.J. 330 : (1965) 29 F.J.R. 76, the question whether it was permissible for the employers to frame standing orders in respect of matters not mentioned in the Schedule to the Act was considered. The Supreme Court held that the employer cannot insist upon adding a condition to the standing orders which related to a matter not included in the Schedule. In Associated Cement Cos. Ltd. v. P.O. Vyas , the Supreme Court held that the cumulative effect of Sections 3, 4, 5, and 15 was that the certifying officer has to be satisfied that the draft standing orders deal with matters set out in the Schedule and are otherwise in conformity with the Act. This requirement clearly implies that the draft standing orders must be in conformity with the Act.
