Madras High Court· 22 July 2026

Must a writ court measure a candidate's marks against the cut-off fixed by the department before directing inclusion in a promotion panel?

The Superintendent of Police Tirunelveli District, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli 627 002 v. R.Murugesan

WA No. 2012 of 2026 · WA No. 2012 of 2026
Coram: Justice S.M.Subramaniam · Justice N.Senthilkumar

🔖 Save this judgment 📬 Get today's judgments

View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.

Answer

Yes. The cut-off fixed by the department is the standard against which the marks secured fall to be judged. Here the cut-off for the Sub Inspector of Police (Armed Reserve) panel for 2003 was 65.34 and the candidate had secured 50.14 out of 100; an order made without taking that comparison into account cannot stand.

Headnote

Service Rules — Delay and laches — Alternate remedy — Promotion panel — Cut-off marks — Service Rules — Delay and laches — Grievance to be redressed within three years — Held: A writ petition filed nine years after the promotion test, without the appeal or revision the Service Rules provide, falls foul of delay and laches; grievances relating to revision of seniority and promotion must be redressed within three years. (¶5, ¶6) Promotion to Sub Inspector — Cut-off marks — Marks secured to be measured against the cut-off — Held further: The writ court weighed neither the delay nor the cut-off fixed by the department against the marks secured. Writ order set aside; appeal allowed. (¶6, ¶7)

In the Court's own words

Paragraph 6Secondly, the alternate remedy contemplated under the Service Rules had not been exhausted. Even on merits, the respondent passed the written test and was permitted to participate in the Drill Test and Viva-voce and he secured 50.14 marks out of 100. However, the cut-off for promotion to the post of Sub Inspector of Police (Armed Reserve) for the year 2003 was fixed at 65.34. Thus, the respondent was within the zone of consideration for inclusion of his name in the panel of Sub Inspector (Armed Reserve) for the year 2003. Delay and laches is not considered by the Writ Court. That apart, the cut off marks fixed by the department at 65.34 was also not taken into consideration with reference to the marks secured by the respondent ie., 50.14. Even as per the Rules, grievances relating to revision of seniority and promotion must be redressed within a period of three years. However, the writ petition itself has been instituted after a lapse of nine years.

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of The Superintendent of Police Tirunelveli District, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli 627 002 v. R.Murugesan — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment

Is a writ petition challenging a promotion panel maintainable years later, where the Service Rules provide an appeal and a period within which the grievance must be raised?

Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Madras High Court. Corrections