The present study was aimed at examining the association between transformational leadership and organizational commitment, and the mediating role of psychological empowerment in the association between them. Even though there are plenty of empirical studies on the association between leadership styles and organizational commitment in various contexts, there is inadequate evidence in the Sri Lankan context. Considering the gap in the current literature, the study was conducted on the Development Officers working in the public sector organizations in the Jaffna region. For this purpose a sample of 235 Development Officers attached to the District Secretariat and Divisional Secretariats was selected based on random sampling method. The transformational leadership was measured using MLQ- Form 5x (Bass & Avolio, 2000), organizational commitment was measured using OCQ (Meyer & Allen, 1997) and empowerment was measured using Empowerment Scale (Spreitzer, 1995). Exploratory factor analysis and Confirmatory factor analysis were performed to validate the data and then the constructs were integrated in the structural equation model to find the relationships among the variables. The results revealed that the direct effect of transformational leadership on organizational commitment is not significant (b=.011, p>.05). The effect of transformational leadership on psychological empowerment is significant (B=.621, p=.001). The results confirm that psychological empowerment doesn’t act as a mediator in the effect of transformational leadership on organizational commitment (direct effect and indirect effect are not significant). As the present study concludes transformational leadership is not effective in promoting commitment of Development Officers working at District and Divisional Secretariats, future research should cover other public sector and private sector organizations. As the operative level employees’ perception of their superiors’ (first line leaders) leadership style was studied, future studies need to focus on the middle and top level leaders’ leadership styles and the resultant outcomes.