For Out Of Turn Promotion, Parity Can't Be Claimed : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of India recently held that out of turn promotions can’t be claimed as a matter of right under the Madhya Pradesh Police Regulations. A Bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar was hearing an appeal moved by the State challenging orders of the High Court which held that the Respondent was entitled to an out of turn promotion as a matter of parity. “As per Regulation 70A, out of turn promotion can't be claimed as a matter of right. The issue has to be considered objectively. Once committee takes a conscious decision on consideration of case objectively in line with Regulation 70A and process is fair, just and equitable, the Court's intervention is minimal.” The Respondent was serving was SI of Police and had claimed that he was entitled to an out of turn promotion under Regulation 70A of the Regulations. The provision reads as follows, “{"70.A Notwithstanding anything contained in Regulation 70 , a Constable may be promoted to the rank of Head Constable by the Superintendent of Police with the prior approval of the Directors General of Police and a Head Constable to the rank of Assistant Sub -Inspector by the Deputy Inspector General of Police with the prior approval of the Director General of Police if he has distinguished himself inanti dacoit operations. Law and order situations of shooting competitions or in some other field of duty or who has been awarded the President's Police Medal for Gallantry or for meritorious/distinguished services, if he considers him suitable for promotion. Similarly the Inspector General of Police may promote an Assistant Sub -Inspector to the rank of Sub -Inspector and a Sub -Inspector to the rank of an Inspector on similar grounds if found suitable for promotion and subject to the prior approval of the Director General of Police. The number of Officers promoted under this Regulation shall not exceed 10 per cent."] After the High Court’s intervention, the committee in charge for promotions considered his case. By giving cogent and detailed reasons, the committee opined that his out of turn promotion is without reason. The Respondent was denied his claim. The State’s decision not to grant an out of turn promotion was subject matter before Single Judge. The Respondent stated that another officer was given out of turn promotion and therefore, claim parity. The Single Judge found fault with the committee’s report and set aside the non-grant of promotion while directing the state to grant him promotion. This was challenged before the Division Bench which affirmed the Single Judge’s view and dismissed the appeal. This prompted the State to moved an appeal before the Apex Court. The Court opined that the Respondent’s case was considered by committee objectively, by looking into all the relevant aspects. “As observed above, out of turn promotion can't be claimed as a matter of right and only in a case under regulation 70A”, the Court reiterated. Both the Single Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court “erred” in setting aside the committee’s report, the Top Court viewed. The Court also did not agree with the Division Bench’s view that that the Committee’s report is arbitrary. “The Division Bench observed that Single Judge had found that committee’s report was arbitrary. How can report be considered arbitrary when the committee considered all parameters under Regulation 70A? Once committee takes a conscious decision thereafter the court will not be justified in interfering with such a decision unless it is found to be palpably arbitrarily and or perverse. Cogent reasons have been given by committee in every aspect.” The Bench also opined that claiming parity in a matter pertaining to out of turn promotion isn’t the correct way in law. “So far as far as parity claimed, there can't be any parity as far as out of turn promotion is concerned. Facts differ from person to person, officer to officer and Act and Act. For out of turn promotion, parity can't be claimed.” On these grounds, the Bench quashed and set aside both the High Court judgements. Case Title: The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Anr. Mrinal Gopal Elker[P-1] Versus Sanjay Shukla | Slp(C) No. 1040/2021 Iv-CCitation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 277Madhya Pradesh Police Regulations - As per Regulation 70A, out-of-turn promotion cannot be claimed as a matter of right.Click Here To Read/Download Judgment

For Out Of Turn Promotion, Parity Can't Be Claimed : Supreme Court

Rintu Mariam Biju

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

For Out Of Turn Promotion, Parity Can't Be Claimed : Supreme Court

Rintu Mariam Biju

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers