Page 1 of 4. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 19136 of 2026 Sharan Kumar ..... Petitioner Mr. S. Nayak, Advocate -versus- General Manager, Human Resources Department, CANARA Bank, Bhubaneswar & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. A.K. Mishra-2, Advocate CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 22.07.2026 Order No. 05 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. S. Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. A.K. Mishra-1, learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “In the circumstances stated hereinabove, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to: (a) Admit the present Writ Petition, call for the records; (b) Issue writ/writs in the nature of certiorari/mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ/order/direction quashing the transfer order dated 02 May 2026 bearing Reference No. HRWPM 2026 AGT:839343:1 as well as the email communication dated Page 2 of 4. 20 May 2026 rejecting the Petitioner's appeal under Annexure-1; (c) Issue writ/writs in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to consider and dispose of the representation dated 04 May 2026 submitted by the Petitioner in a fair, reasonable, objective, and humane manner and to consider the transfer of the Petitioner to us home town on sympathetic ground; (d) Issue writ/writs/orders/directions directing the Opposite Parties not to relieve the Petitioner from his present place of posting at Bhubaneswar during the pendency of the present Writ Petition; (e) Issue appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, or direction/directions directing the Opposite Parties to forthwith release and restore the salary and service benefits of the Petitioner, which have been withheld/stopped with effect from 01 June 2026; (f) Issue appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, or direction/directions restraining the Opposite Parties from treating the Petitioner's service at Canara Bank, Circle Office, Bhubaneswar, since 02 May 2026, as unauthorized leave, marked as loss of pay, and from initiating any coercive or disciplinary action against the Petitioner on the basis thereof during pendency of the present Writ Petition; (g) Pass such other order/orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Page 3 of 4. And for this act of kindness, the Petitioner, as in duty bound, shall ever pray.” 4. It is contended that Petitioner when was put under transfer from Bhubaneswar Circle Office to Bengaluru Circle Office vide order dtd.02.05.2026 under Annexure-1, Petitioner made a grievance under Annexure-2 with a request to transfer him to his home town i.e. Haryana/Delhi/Delhi NCR in terms of Bank’s Rules, Regulation and Policies. However, such prayer of the Petitioner was rejected vide Annexure-5 E-mail communication dtd.26.05.2026. 4.1. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that since admittedly the impugned order of transfer has been passed contrary to the transfer policy so available under Annexure-3, in consideration of the representation made by the Petitioner under Annexure-2, Petitioner’s claim could not have been rejected on the ground indicated in Annexure-5. 4.2. It is further contended that even though Petitioner was relieved from Bhubaneswar Circle Office on 30.05.2026, but he was again allowed to continue in the same C.O. w.e.f.01.06.2026 and continuing as such in the said Circle Office till date. 5. Mr. A.K. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Party- Bank on the other hand contended that after being put under transfer vide order dtd.02.05.2026, Petitioner when made a representation under Annexure-2 to give him a posting near his home town, the same after being duly considered, was rejected vide E-mail communication dtd.26.05.2026 under Annexure-5. Page 4 of 4. 5.1. It is further contended that even though Petitioner was relieved from Bhubaneswar Circle Office on 30.05.2026, but because of some urgency involved, Petitioner was again allowed to continue in Bhubaneswar Circle Office w.e.f.01.06.2026 and now because of the interim order passed by this Court on 25.06.2026, he is continuing in the said Circle Office. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submission made, this Court taking into account the transfer policy available under Annexure-3 and reliance placed on the same by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, is of the view that Petitioner’s claim for his posting in his home town or to any nearby place, requires a fresh consideration by the Opp. Party- Bank. 6.1. It is also the view of this Court that while rejecting the Petitioner’s claim considering the representation under Annexure-2, no sufficient reason has been assigned. 6.2. In view of the aforesaid analysis, this Court while quashing the order of rejection dtd.20.05.2026 under Annexure-1 series, directs Opp. Party No. 2 to take a fresh decision on the Petitioner’s claim to get the benefit of posting in his home town or any nearby place as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (3) weeks hence. For a period of three (3) weeks, interim order passed by this Court on 25.06.2026 shall continue. 7. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha