News18| Parity can't be claimed for out of turn promotion: SC

There cannot be any parity for claiming out-of-turn promotion, the Supreme Court has held.

"The facts differ from person to person and officer to officer and Act to Act. Therefore, in case of out-of-turn promotion, there cannot be any parity claimed", a bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar has observed.

In the case before Court, an appeal was filed against the order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, by which it had dismissed the writ appeal preferred by the appellant(s)/State and had confirmed the judgment and order passed by the Single Judge directing the appellant(s)/State to give out-of-turn promotion to one Sanjay Shukla.

Shukla, who at the relevant time was serving as Sub-Inspector of Police, had claimed out-of-turn promotion under Regulation 70A of the Madhya Pradesh Police Regulations.

Notably, by giving cogent and detailed reasons, the Committee created for considering his case, opined that no case for out-of-turn promotion is made out.

The decision of the Committee and the State not to grant out-of-turn promotion was challenged before a Single Judge wherein parity was claimed inter alia submitting that in case of one another person, namely, Mr. B. S. Parihar, out-of-turn promotion was given.

Supreme Court noted that as per Regulation 70A, out-of-turn promotion could not be claimed as a matter of right.

"Once, the Committee takes a conscious decision on consideration of the case objectively in line with Regulation 70A and the process is found to be fair, just and equitable, thereafter, the Court’s intervention is minimal. On considering the report of the Committee, it appears that case of the respondent for out-of-turn promotion was considered by the Committee objectively and the case of the respondent was considered taking into consideration all the relevant aspects on which out-of-turn promotion under Regulation 70A can be granted...", the apex court further noted.

It was further observed that the Single Judge as well as the Division Bench had erred in setting aside the report of the Committee and materially erred in directing the State to grant out-of-turn promotion as,

"Once, the Committee constituted takes a conscious decision objectively, thereafter, the Court would not be justified in interfering with such a decision unless it is found to be palpably arbitrary and/or perverse."

With this view, the bench directed that the impugned judgment was unsustainable and was to be quashed and set aside.

Case Title: THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR. vs. SANJAY SHUKLA