Madhya Pradesh High Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging Public Service Promotion Rules 2025
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on Monday (July 7), issued a notice to the State in a public interest litigation challenging the M.P. Public Service (Promotion) Rules 2025. The court also directed the State to produce a comparative table between the new promotion rules as well as the Rules of 2002, which are sub-judice before the Supreme Court.
The bench of Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf directed:
"State shall also produce a comparative table between the Rules of 2002, which is the subject matter of the proceedings in the case of R.B.Rai Vs. State of M.P. pending before the Supreme Court and the new Rules of 2025 on the said date".
The petitioner claimed that the 2025 Rules are violative of the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court. It was argued that the new rules are nearly identical to the 2002 rules, which were struck down by the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The court R.B. Rai vs. State of Madhya Pradesh [W.P. No.1942/2011] had stated:
"Rules of 2002 runs contrary to the constitutional provisions contained in clause (4A) and (4B) of Article 16 and Article 335 of the Constitution and the law predicated in M. Nagaraj (supra), are declared ultra vires and non-est in law".
The petitioner argued that despite this history, the state introduced the new rules with only minor changes. The petitioner also informed the court that although the State has challenged the R.B. Rai decision before the Supreme Court, it was sub-judice. However, an interim order was passed directing the State to maintain the status quo regarding the reserved category promoted candidates. As a result of the interim order, the petitioner claims, all higher posts are being occupied by reserved category candidates.
The court questioned the State's decision to draft new rules while the older, similar rules were under review before the Supreme Court. The court remarked, "If these rules are subject to final outcome, then where is the question of framing new rules? The matter is pending; wait for the judgment".
When State's counsel argued that the promotions were stuck because the Supreme Court had quashed the roster, the court responded: "That means the rules are quashed. Matter is subjudice before the Supreme Court. Now you are bringing new rules to override the Supreme Court judgment?"
The state replies that the new rules were not intended to override the judgment, but were designed to follow the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court.
The court, however, emphasised, "First, you withdraw the challenge in RB Rai (before the Supreme Court) and come. Either you withdraw it or you have that settled before the Supreme Court. How can you frame new rules on the same lines?"
While the court did not pass any formal interim order, it directed the State not to make any promotions based on the new rules of 2025 until further order. "We won't grant that (Any interim order). But we want your statements that you won't do it (promote per the new rules of 2025 in the meantime)", the court stated, listing the matter for July 15, 2025.
For Petitioners: Senior Advocate Sanjay K. Agrawal with Advocates Suyash Mohan Guru and Hindesh Pal
For Respondents: Advocate General Prashant Singh with Additional Advocate General Janhavi Pandit
Case Title: Dr Swati Tiwari v State of Madhya Pradesh (WP No. 24880 of 2025)