1. Heard Learned Sr. Counsel Mr. P Roy Barman, assisted by Mr. Samrat Bhattacharjee, Learned Counsel and Mr. Kaushik Nath, Learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Mr. Prabir Saha, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents-Bank.

2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking the following reliefs:-

               “i. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders, direction/directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondents to allow the Petitioner to appear in the online promotional examination of officers for the post of general stream from Officer Scale I to Officer Scale II, in pursuance to the Notification dated, 27.11.2024, issued by the General Manager (HR), TGB, which is scheduled to be held on 25.01.2025.

               ii. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders, direction/directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby quashing the email communication dated, 06.01.2025, wherein the Petitioner's application for promotion has been regretted.

               iii. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders, direction/ directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby declare, that, the clause 11(c) of the aforesaid Promotion Policy of Tripura Gramin Bank, dated, 27.11.2024, as irrational, unreasonable and arbitrary.

               iv. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders, direction/ directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby declare that, the Clause 8 of Promotion Circular no 39, dated, 27.11.2024, as irrational, unreasonable and arbitrary.

               v. Call for the records pertaining to the instant writ petition from the custody of the Respondents and make the Rules absolute after hearing the both sides.

               vi. Make the Rules absolute after hearing the Parties."

3. Taking part in the hearing Learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner drawn the attention of this Court that the petitioner joined in the Tripura Gramin Bank as Officer, Junior Management (Scale-I), on 21.03.2012 and after that he was promoted to the post of Officer, Scale-II on 28.12.2018.

4. It was further submitted that a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner on 21.10.2021 and after completion of inquiry the petitioner was found guilty and the following punishment was imposed upon the petitioner:

               “ “Reduction to next lower grade of Officers”

               Your basic pay will be fixed at Rs.36000/-, as per pay scale of Officers Scale 1.”

               In this regard, reliance was placed upon the final order of the disciplinary proceeding (Annexure-1).

5. It was further submitted that as per the provisional Seniority List of Officers, Office Assistants and Office Attendants (as on 01.01.2025), issued by the Chief Manager (HR), dated 02.01.2025 published in terms of Tripura Gramin Bank (Officers & Employees) Service Regulation 2010, the name of the petitioner was shown at Sl. No.2 and his designation has been shown as Assistant Manager showing date of joining on 21.03.2012.

6. It was further submitted that as per Regional Rural Banks (Appointment of Officers and Employees), Rules, 2017 (for short, Rules 2017) the petitioner is eligible to appear in the promotional examination for the post of Officer, Scale-II through Normal Channel, issued by the General Manager (HR) on 27.11.2024 and accordingly the same was communicated to all.

7. Learned Sr. Counsel thereafter drawn the attention of this Court that the respondent Bank by notification dated 27.11.2024 issued Promotion Policy of Tripura Gramin Bank (Annexure-9) wherein at para No.11(c) the following assertion has been made:

               “11. Consequences arising out of imposition of penalty

               (c) An officer/employee who has been imposed major penalty of reduction to a lower grade shall be considered for promotion only after completion of prescribed length of service, as prescribed for other candidates, from the date of order for reduction to lower grade or post.”

8. It was further submitted by Learned Sr. Counsel that in the said Promotion Policy in sub-clause (b) of clause 11 the following assertion was also made:

               “11. Consequences arising out of imposition of penalty

               (b) An officer/ employee who has been imposed major penalty, except the major penalty of reduction to a lower grade, will not be eligible for promotion for a period of one year from the date the major penalty was imposed.”

9. Referring the same Learned Sr. Counsel submitted that in view of the said Policy an Officer/employee who has been imposed major penalty, except the major penalty of reduction to a lower grade, will not be eligible for promotion for a period of one year from the date the major penalty was imposed.

10. Learned Sr. Counsel drawn the attention of the Court that the notification dated 23.08.2017 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Service (Annexure-3) wherein in respect of promotion through Normal Channel following guidelines have been issued:

               “(I) Normal channel:

               (i) must have eight years’ experience as Officer Junior Management (Scale I) on full time and regular basis;

               (ii) must have been confirmed in the feeder grade.

               (II)Fast Track Channel:

               (i) must have six years’ service as Officer Junior Management (Scale I) on full time and regular basis;

               (ii) must have been confirmed in the feeder grade.”

11. Learned Sr. Counsel further submitted that in the disciplinary proceeding the punishment order was issued upon the petitioner on 01.03.2022 (Annexre-1) and referring the same the Learned Sr. Counsel submitted that in the said punishment order it was not mentioned that the present petitioner would be debarred from any future/better employment or other benefits. Even the existing rules and regulations of the bank also say like that. But due to inclusion the aforesaid clause 11(c) in the Promotion Policy dated 27.11.2024 and also the clause 8 of the promotion circular No.39 dated 27.11.2024 the scope of the petitioner for further advancement/development in service has been curtailed.

12. So, Learned Sr. Counsel has urged for declaring the aforesaid clause 11(c) of the Promotion Policy dated 27.11.2024 and clause 8 of the promotion circular No. 39 dated 27.11.2024 as irrational, unreasonable and arbitrary.

13. Learned Sr. Counsel drawn the attention of the Court that the notification dated 24.06.2022 (Annexure-4) of the writ petition wherein in clause 8 following assertions/guidelines has been mentioned by the respondent department:

               “8. Debarment from Promotion Opportunity:

               If a major penalty is inflicted upon the Officer concerned as a result of the disciplinary proceedings or if he/she is found guilty in the court proceedings, he/she would not be permitted to participate in the promotion Process for a period of 1(one) year reckoned from the date, the punishment was inflicted/date of conviction. If an Officer brings in outside influence on the Bank to further his/her own interest in the matter of transfer/posting, promotion or to influence any disciplinary action inflicted upon him/her by the Bank, the Officer concerned will not be permitted to participate in the promotion process for a period of 3 (three) years reckoned from the date of such outside influence as recorded by the Bank.

               The Head of the Branches/Offices/Departments are advised to bring the contents of the circular to the notice of all concerned positively and one copy of the circular is to be displayed in the Notice Board for information.”

14. Referring the same he further submitted that the said clause 8 has been modified by the subsequent promotion policy issued by the respondent Bank dated 09.02.2023 (Annexure-5) where in cause No.11(c) the following assertion also has been made:

               “11. Consequences arising out of imposition of penalty

               (c) An officer/employee who has been imposed major penalty of reduction to a lower grade shall be considered for promotion only after completion of prescribed length of service, as prescribed for other candidates, from the date of order for reduction to lower grade or post.”

15. Again the same clause has been reiterated by the respondent in the subsequent policy on 27.11.2024 (Annexure-9). So, Learned Sr. Counsel has submitted that since Annexure - 5 & 9 are contradictory to the circular dated 24.06.2022 (Annexure-4) issued by the respondent department, so the interference of the Court is required. So Learned Sr. Counsel urged for allowing this writ petition.

16. The respondent Bank has contested the same by filing counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit, in para 9,10,11,16 the respondent Bank has asserted the following facts and has prayed for dismissal of the writ petition with costs:

               “9. That, in response to the averments made in Para- 7 of the Writ Petition under reply, it is denied and disputed by the answering Respondent Bank.

               It is submitted that, though the Petitioner had joined in the Bank and in spite of having the Rule, 2017 and though, the name of the Petitioner is possessing in the seniority list, it does not mean that the Petitioner is eligible to appear in the Promotional Examination for the post of Officer Scale-II through Normal Channel, since, the Writ Petitioner had already availed the opportunity of minimum criteria of service length in the Bank for a period of six year with effect from his date of joining (21/03/2012), while he was promoted from the Post of Officer scale-I to Officer Scale-II in previous occasion.

               It is further submitted that, after getting the Departmental punishment w.e.f 01/03/2022, the Writ Petitioner has to complete a service length to the tune of a minimum further 6 (six) years service in the Bank as Officer Scale-I w.e.f 01/03/2022 following the Clause 11(C) of such Promotion Policy of the Bank dated 27/11/2024 read with the Column 7 under Sl. No. 2 Regional Rural Banks (Appointment of Officers and Employees) Rules, 2017 and if the Petitioner wishes to appear in the promotional Exam under Fast Track Channel, he has to complete the length of his service in the Bank as a Officer Scale-I for a minimum a period of 8 (eight) years w.e.f. the date (i.e. 01/03/2022) of Departmental punishment following the Clause 11(C) of such Promotion Policy read with the Column 7 under Sl. No. 2 Regional Rural Banks (Appointment of Officers and Employees) Rules, 2017.

               The answering Respondent Bank further most respectfully further submitted that following the Clause 11(C) of such Promotion Policy read with the Column 7 under Sl. No. 2 Regional Rural Banks (Appointment of Officers and Employees) Rules, 2017, the Writ Petitioner will be eligible to appear in the Promotional exam w.e.f. 01/04/2028(FY:2028-29) under Fast Track Channel and w.e.f. 01/04/2030(FY:2030-31)under Normal Channel. (Annexure-3, 5 & 9 to the Writ Petition).

               10. That, in response to the averments made in Para- 8 of the Writ Petition under reply, it is denied and disputed by the answering Respondent Bank. It is most respectfully submitted that Annexure-4 as made in support of the instant paragraph is nothing but an advertisement for promotion from Officer Scale-1 to Officer Scale-II, wherein, the clause 8 of the same stated into the effect that "If a major penalty is inflicted upon the Officer concerned as a result of the disciplinary proceedings or if he/she is found guilty in the court proceedings, he/she would not be permitted to participate in the promotion process for a period of 1(one) years reckoned from the date, the punishment was inflicted/date of conviction..". But this advertisement was published before enactment of the First Promotion Policy dated 09/02/2023, thereafter also the said Policy also amended on 27/11/2024. (Annexure- 5 & 9 to the Writ Petition).

               11. That, in response to the averments made in Para- 9 of the Writ Petition under reply, it is submitted that, Column 7 under Sl. No.2 Regional Rural Banks (Appointment of Officers and Employees) Rules, 2017 (Annexure-3, Page-41 to the Writ Petition) deals with eligibility criteria of promotion of Officers Scale-I to Officers Scale-II under Normal Channel and under Fast Track Channel which stated into the effect that ".. Promotion shall be made from amongst the officers holding the post of Officer Junior Management (Scale-I) possessing the following experience and/qualification:

               Normal Channel:

               (i) Must have eight years experience as Officer Junior Management(Scale-I) on full time and regular basis;

               (ii) Must have been confirmed in the feeder grade.

               Fast Track Channel:

               i. Must have six years' service as Officer Junior Management(Scale-I) on full time and regular basis;

               ii. Must have been confirmed in the feeder grade."

               The answering Respondent Bank further most respectfully stated that following the provision of Fast Track Channel, the Writ Petitioner was promoted as Officer Scale-II from the Officer Scale-I on 29/12/2018. Therefore, the Writ Petitioner had already availed the opportunity of minimum criteria of completion of his 6 (Six) years service in the Bank with effect from his date of joining i.e. 21/03/2012. Thereafter due to committing of major irregularities and gross misconducts violating the norms of the Bank in sanctioning and disbursing loan fraudulently, the Writ Petitioner was punished w.e.f. 01/03/2022 in connection with the Departmental Proceedings as drawn up against the Petitioner which stated into the effect that ".. After considering the facts, circumstances of the case and gravity of misconduct, the following punishment as specified in item (ii) of Clause (b) Sub-Reduction (1) of Regulation 39 of Tripura Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010, is inflicted upon you with immediate effect Reduction to next lower grade of Officers. Your Basic Pay will be fixed at Rs.36,000/- as per pay Scale of Officers Scale-I".

               The answering Respondent Bank further most respectfully stated that Regulation 39(1)(b) of Tripura Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010 deals with punishment under Major Penalties. Regulation 39(1)(b) comprises 5 types of major penalties. The Writ Petitioner was penalized under item (ii) of Clause (b) Sub-Reduction(1) of Regulation 39 of Tripura Gramin Bank(Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010.

               (Copy of Tripura Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010 is attached herewith as Annexure-R/1).

               The answering Respondent Bank again most respectfully stated that, in accordance with the Regional Rural Banks (Appointment of Officers and employees) Rules, 2017, the Board of Director of the Bank in its 265th meeting exercising the power conferred upon the Regional Rural Bank's Act.1976 has approved the Promotion Policy for Tripura Gramin Bank w.e.f. 02/04/2023. (Annexure-5 to the Writ Petition) Clause 11(C) of such Promotion Policy stated into the effect that "An Officer/employee who has been imposed major penalty of reduction to a lower grade shall be considered for promotion only after completion of prescribed length of service, as prescribed for other candidates from the date of order for reduction to lower grade or post".

               Therefore, the Petitioner had already availed the opportunity of minimum criteria of service in the Bank for a period of 6 (six) years w.e.f. his date of joining (21/03/2012), while he was promoted from the Post of Officer scale-I to Officer Scale-II. After getting the Departmental punishment w.e.f 01/03/2022, the Writ Petitioner has to complete a service length to the tune of a minimum six years service in the Bank as Officer Scale-I w.e.f 01/03/2022 following the Clause 11(C) of such Promotion Policy dated 09/02/2023 and thereafter dated 27/11/2024 read with the Column 7 under Sl. No. 2, Regional Rural Banks (Appointment of Officers and Employees) Rules, 2017, if the Petitioner wishes to appear in the promotional Exam under Fast Track Channel, he has to complete the length of his service in the Bank as a Officer Scale-I for a minimum a period of eight years w.e.f. the date (i.e. 01/03/2022) of Departmental punishment following the Clause 11(C) of such Promotion Policy dated 09/02/2023 and thereafter dated 27/11/2024 (Annexure- 9 to the Writ Petition) read with the Column 7 under Sl. No. 2 Regional Rural Banks (Appointment of Officers and Employees) Rules, 2017.

16. That, in response to the averments made in Para- 16 of the Writ Petition under reply, it is admitted by the answering Respondent Bank, Clause 11(C) of such Promotion Policy dated 27/11/2024 (Annexure-9 to the Writ Petition), it is stated into the effect that "....An Officer/employee who has been imposed major penalty of reduction to a lower grade shall be considered for promotion only after completion of prescribed length of service, as prescribed for other candidates from the date of order for reduction to lower grade or post.." and the answering Respondent-Bank further most respectfully stated that, the said clause is remain same as it was remain in earlier promotion policy dated 09/02/2023.”

17. At the time of hearing Learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner relied upon Annexure-4 i.e. the memo dated 24.06.2022, clause No.8 and submitted that by the said memo it was decided by the Bank that if any officer is inflicted penalty as a result of the Departmental Proceeding or found guilty in Court proceeding he would not be permitted to participate in the promotion process for a period of one year reckoned from the date the punishment was inflicted/date of conviction and the same clause may be applied in the case of the present petitioner. But in respect of imposition of punishment vide memo dated 01.03.2022 (Annexure-1) he did not submit anything and tried to draw the attention of the Court that the subsequent Promotion Policy of the Bank dated 09.02.2023 i.e. (Annexure-5) and 27.11.2024 (Annexure-9) are unconstitutional, arbitrary and illegal. So he urged for declaring the said notification as arbitrary & illegal.

18. On the other hand Learned Counsel Mr. P Saha, for the Bank submitted that by the Promotion Policy dated 09.02.2023 (Annexure-5) and subsequent Promotion Policy dated 27.11.2024 (Annexure-9) the said clause has been modified and since by the memo dated 01.03.2022 the petitioner has been imposed major penalty “reduction to next lower grade officers”, so he cannot take advantage of the said notification and as such, there is no merit in the writ petition filed and urged for dismissal of the writ petition.

19. I have heard both the parties and perused the writ petition and the documents annexed with the writ petition as well as the counter affidavit filed by the respondent Bank.

20. Admittedly, there is no dispute on record regarding imposition of major penalty by the department to the petitioner. For the sake of convenience, I would like to refer herein below the relevant clause No.8 of the communication dated 24.06.2022 (Annexure-4) which is as follows:

               “8. Debarment from Promotion Opportunity:

               If a major penalty is inflicted upon the Officer concerned as a result of the disciplinary proceedings or if he/she is found guilty in the court proceedings, he/she would not be permitted to participate in the promotion Process for a period of 1(one) year reckoned from the date, the punishment was inflicted/date of conviction. If an Officer brings in outside influence on the Bank to further his/her own interest in the matter of transfer/posting, promotion or to influence any disciplinary action inflicted upon him/her by the Bank, the Officer concerned will not be permitted to participate in the promotion process for a period of 3(three) years reckoned from the date of such outside influence as recorded by the Bank.

               The Head of the Branches/Offices/Departments are advised to bring the contents of the circular to the notice of all concerned positively and one copy of the circular is to be displayed in the Notice Board for information.”

21. The respondent Bank issued further Promotion Policy on 09.02.2023 (Annexure-5) and in the said policy in clause 11(c) following assertion has been made by the department:

               “11. Consequences arising out of imposition of penalty

               (c) An officer/employee who has been imposed major penalty of reduction to a lower grade shall be considered for promotion only after completion of prescribed length of service, as prescribed for other candidates, from the date of order for reduction to lower grade or post.”

22. Similarly in the subsequent Promotion Policy of the year 2024 dated 27.11.2024 (Annexure-9), the same clause 11(c) has been reiterated in the same policy and similarly in Circular-39 dated 27.11.2024 issued by the respondent Bank (Annexure-10) issued by General Manager(HR) in clause 8 the following assertions have been made:

               “8. Debarment from Promotion Opportunity:

               If a major penalty is inflicted upon the Officer concerned as a result of the disciplinary proceedings or if he/she is found guilty in the court proceedings, he/she would not be permitted to participate in the promotion Process for a period of 1(one) year reckoned from the date, the punishment was inflicted/date of conviction. If an Officer brings in outside influence on the Bank to further his/her own interest in the matter of transfer/posting, promotion or to influence any disciplinary action inflicted upon him/her by the Bank, the Officer concerned will not be permitted to participate in the promotion process for a period of 3(three) years reckoned from the date of such outside influence as recorded by the Bank. An officer who has been imposed major penalty of reduction to a lower grade shall be considered for promotion only after completion of prescribed length of service, as prescribed for other candidates, from the date of order for reduction to lower grade or post.

               Any issue not mentioned here will be guided as per the provisions of "Promotion Policy of Tripura Gramin Bank" dated 27.11.2024. The Head of the Branches/ Offices/Divisions are advised to bring the contents of the circular to the notice of all concerned positively.”

23. On perusal of the aforesaid circulars/policies it appears that by the said policy and memorandum the respondent Bank has modified the earlier memo dated 24.06.2022 (Annexure-4) and by the subsequent memo the right of the present petitioner has been curtailed and in the considered opinion of the Court , the eligibility of the petitioner would accrue only after completion of the prescribed length of service as prescribed for other candidates from the date of order of reduction to lower grade or post.

24. The petitioner in this case has failed to satisfy the Court to interfere with the said Promotion Policy since he did not challenge his order of punishment dated 01.03.2022 (Annexure-1) and as such, it appears to this Court that the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief in this writ petition.

25. Further probably the notification/communication dated 24.06.2022 (Annexure-4) was issued based upon earlier promotion policy because in the said policy nothing was mentioned in respect of the officer/person who has been imposed major penalty to reduction to a lower grade. But in the subsequent promotion policy dated 09.02.2023 (Annexure-5) and the policy dated 27.11.2024 (Annexure-9) the said clause has been inserted and accordingly in the relevant circular dated 27.11.2024 in clause 8, the said para has been incorporated.

26. Admittedly, the order of punishment dated 01.03.2022 (Annexure-1) has not been challenged by the petitioner. Even at the time of hearing Learned Sr. Counsel did not submit anything in this regard and thus the same order has attained finality. It is the settled position of law that the right of promotion depends upon some policies and it is the prerogative of the department concerned to frame their promotion policy for the interest of the employees concerned, although the same cannot be claimed as a matter of right. The respondent department framed the promotion policy for the interest of the employees. As already stated, the petitioner has not challenged the punishment order (Annexure-1). So until and unless the said order has been challenged or nullified, there is no scope on the part of the petitioner to challenge the subsequent promotion policies and circular dated 27.11.2024 stating the same to be arbitrary & unlawful and furthermore, the petitioner also failed to satisfy the court by showing any legitimate law to substantiate that the respondent bank had no authority to alter/modify the promotion policies for the interest of its employees.

27. Situated thus, it appears that the present petitioner has failed to make out any case for interference to declare the relevant clause of the promotion policies, as mentioned in the writ petition, to be illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and as such, the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief in the writ petition. Furthermore, the petitioner has not challenged the order of punishment dated 01.03.2022 (Annexure-1) as stated supra.

28. In the result, there is no merit in the writ petition filed by the present petitioner, as the petitioner has fail to make out any case for interference. As such, the present writ petition stands dismissed being devoid of merit.

No order is passed as to costs.

Pending applications, if any, also stands disposed of.