CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK versus RAJENDRA NATH CHAWLA

Citation: [1996] 1 S.C.R. 1106 · Decided: 31-01-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, 
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK 
,_ .. 
v. 
RAJENDRA NATH CHAWLA 
B 
JANUARY 31, 1996 
[K. RAMASWAMY, B.L. HANSARIA AND S.B. MAJMUDAR, JJ.] 
Seivice Law-Promotio11-Ba11k-l'reco11ditio11 of two years mral/semi-
.... 
c 
wba11 service-Circular permitti11g officers, who had 11ot completed rural 
bra11ch experie11ce, to be considered for promotio11 to MMG Scale 
/I-Promoted officers to be posted straightaway to mral bra11ches to complete 
te11ure of rural posti11g-Refusal of posting i11 rural bra11ches to debar officer 
for two years from the date he becomes eligible, after fulfilli11g promotio11 
criteria, includi11g necessary mral bra11ch se1vic~Whether officer should be 
D co11sidered after two years from the date of refusal even if he has not completed 
two years i11 ntral branch se1vice-Held, mral/semi-urba11 service a mandatory 
requiremem, either as pre-co11ditio11 or post-conditio11-Wliere officer opted 
-,' 
for promotio11, was considered, promoted a11d posted to mral service which 
he did not complete, the bar becomes operative two years from the date of 
E cancellation. of ntral posting-Two ye01~ of niral bra11ch se1vice 11ecessary to 
make him eligible-Punjab Natio11al Ba11k Officw (Seivice) Regulations, 
Regu/atio11 17-Banking Companies (Acquisition a11d Tra11sfer of Undertak-
ing) Act 1970, s.19 r/w s.12 (2}-<:011stitutio11 of /11dia, Article 14. 
In accordance with the instructions of government, the appellant· 
F bank decided to permit officers who were otherwise eligible for considera· 
lion for promotion but could not complete the rural branch experience for 
no fault of theirs to be considered for promotion to Middle Management 
Grade Scale II (MMG Scale II), subject, i11ter alia, to the promoted officers 
being straightaway posted to rural branches for a requisite number of 
G 
years and their completing their tenure of rural posting. Promoted officers 
refusing posting in rural branches were to be debarred from consideration 
for promotion for two years rrom the date they became eligible, after 
.( 
fullilling the promotion criteria, including necessary rural branch service. 
By Circular no. 1271 dated March 21, 1991, the eligibility criteria was 
reiterated and it was prescribed that an officer refusing promotion could 
H be eligible for promotion after a gap of two years. 
1106 
,.. 
P.N. BANKv. R.N. CHAWLA 
1107 
In January 1990, the respondent did not accept rural branch posting. A 
Again, in February-March 1992, he was given a rural posting which he 
joined, but he requested cancellation of his posting. On both occasions, he 
was informed of the bar that ·would operate. The respondent did not 
thereafter offer himself for posting in any rural branch to complete the 
requisite two years rural posting. 
B 
When application for promotion to MMG Scale II posts were invited 
through circular dated March 30, 1993 to fill up vacancies as per eligibility 
criteria laid down in the 1991 circular, the respondent applied. lnadver· 
tently, he was permitted to appear in the written examination and inter-
view. He was informed thereafter that he was debarred from consideration C 
for promotion for two years from the date he became ineligible and till he 
fulfilled the promotion criteria including necessary rural branch ex-
perience. 
Aggrieved, he filed a writ petition. The High Court allowed the 
petition holding, i.nter alia, that the 1991 circular having omitted the D 
worlds 
11for no fault of theirs" \\1hich \\'as in the 1989 circular, the relaxation 
of two years of service had been granted and therefore, from the initial 
date of the expiry of two years from the date of refusal he became eligible 
for consideration. 
It was contended for the appellant-bank that the two years bar made E 
the officer ineligible for consideration for two years from the date of 
refusal. Thereafter, he was further required to have fulfilled the additional 
promotion criteria, i.e. two years experience of rural branch service. The 
respondent's counsel argued that the oflicer could be considered, and 
promoted, after two years from his first declining the promotion. It was F 
also contended tliat persons similarly situated had been promoted while 
the respondent had been denied promotion. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : 1. The requirement of two years rural/semi-urban service 
was a mandatory pre-condition, and was later made a post-condition. If 
an officer \o\ithout completing two years,

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.