Dear friend, before coming directly to the answer to your query, let me first explain the concept of transfer of employees in the realm of employment. Transfer is the lateral movement of an employee from one post to another or from one place to another in the same organization without detriment to his existing employment status or conditions of service. Again, it may be at the instance of the employer on exigencies of work or at the request of the employee due to his personal reasons. It is the managerial prerogative of the employer to decide who, where, and how long to work depending on the exigencies of work or business interests of the organization, and the consequential hardships or personal inconvenience, if any, likely to be caused to the employee are not matters of concern as long as malafides or impropriety could not be established against the administrative order of transfer. Thus, transfer becomes an incidence of service.
In the case of private employment, of course, transferability is a matter of mutual agreement found in the contract of employment. Sometimes express provisions relating to transfer appear in the agreement and sometimes it is treated as an implied term. Establishments with branches located across the country could legitimately rely on such an implied term. In the words of the Honorable Kerala High Court in its judgment in Joseph v. Mathruboomi Printing & P. Co. Ltd [1991 (1) LLJ 359], "When one takes up employment in any such concern, he carries with him the cross of transferability." As per the verdict of the Division Bench of the Honorable High Court of Allahabad in U.P State Sugar Corporation v. Bipin Kumar Mishra [1994 (1) LLJ 1004], there is no need for a specific standing order for transfer, and the employer is entitled to transfer his employee even in the absence of a specific standing order. Therefore, the contention that nothing specifically mentioned about inter-state transfer of the employee in his appointment orders cannot be a valid point of defense.
Any trade union is empowered to espouse the cause of transfer of its members/employees allegedly done with malafide intention or malice or as a measure of victimization against union activities or without propriety or authority and can raise a dispute under section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before the Conciliation Officer. If conciliation fails, it would be referred for adjudication. The result depends on how the union convinces the tribunal about the alleged malafides or malice behind the orders of transfer.
But a word of caution. If you do not obey the orders of transfer, the management can initiate formal disciplinary action against you and can even terminate your services complying with all legal formalities.