Statutory promotion rules prevail over executive instructions; eligibility must be assessed strictly under the governing regulations.

Executive instructions could not relax or override mandatory Staff Regulations governing promotion. The Court noted that Regulation 10 of the Staff Regulations, 1971 required promotions to be considered by a duly constituted Promotion Board and imposed three years' experience as Assistant Category I for consideration to Category II. Because that eligibility condition formed part of the statutory framework, any direction to dilute it was inconsistent with the Regulations. Promotion claims therefore had to be examined strictly under the governing Staff Regulations, and eligible persons were to be considered only in accordance with those rules.

---

---

Issues: Whether executive instructions issued by the Board could relax or override the statutory Staff Regulations governing promotion, and whether promotions had to be determined strictly in accordance with those Regulations.

Analysis: Regulation 10 of the Staff Regulations, 1971 required promotions to be considered by a duly constituted Promotion Board and regulated by the Corporation's general instructions, while also making three years' experience as Assistant Category I a condition for consideration to Category II. The direction to relax that eligibility requirement was inconsistent with the statutory framework. Executive instructions could not be issued in derogation of statutory Regulations, and the claims of all eligible persons had to be considered under the Regulations themselves.

Conclusion: The Board had no power to relax the statutory promotion Regulations through executive instructions, and the promotions had to be determined in accordance with the Staff Regulations, 1971.

Ratio Decidendi: Executive instructions cannot derogate from or relax mandatory statutory regulations, and promotion eligibility must be assessed strictly under the governing regulations.

---