The Supreme Court in the case of The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Anr. Mrinal Gopal Elker[P-1] Versus Sanjay Shukla, has observed that “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 the committee takes a conscious decision on consideration of the case objectively in line with Regulation 70A and the process is fair, just and equitable, the Court’s intervention is minimal.”

It is pertinent to note that the respondent was serving as SI of the police. He claimed that he was entitled to an out-of-turn promotion under Regulation 70A of the Regulations. The committee in charge of promotion denied his claim. The matter was presented before a single judge of the High Court. The court found faults in the report of the committee and set aside the order of the Committee. The decision of the single-judge bench was challenged before the division bench which affirmed the views of the Single-judge. Following this, the state moved an appeal before the Supreme Court.

The top court while disagreeing with the views of the High Court, observed that, “The Division Bench observed that Single Judge had found that committee’s report was arbitrary. How can a report be considered arbitrary when the committee considered all parameters under Regulation 70A? Once the 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 arbitrary and or perverse. Cogent reasons have been given by the committee in every aspect. So far as parity is 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 to Act. For out-of-turn promotion, parity can’t be claimed.”