brand logo
SC dismisses CI challenges to ASP promos

SC dismisses CI challenges to ASP promos

03 Feb 2026


The Supreme Court (SC) has decided to dismiss seven Fundamental Rights (FR) petitions filed by 145 Chief Inspectors of Police (CI) who challenged the promotions to the rank of Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) based on applications called for in 2020.

The decision was delivered following a lengthy hearing. Chief Justice (CJ) Preethi Padman Surasena announced the verdict with the concurrence of Justices Mahinda Samayawardhena and Sampath K.B. Wijeratne.

According to the case details, the Inspector General of Police had issued an announcement on 31 January 2020, calling for applications for promotions to the rank of ASP. The petitioners alleged that although the Public Service Commission (PSC) conducted interviews and granted the promotions, they were denied the same despite fulfilling all the necessary qualifications. The petitioners further contended that the PSC had admitted that the marks obtained by candidates during the interviews were incorrect and had subsequently amended those marks. They argued that the PSC did not possess the legal authority to alter the marks once awarded, claiming that this process caused them severe prejudice. Additionally, the petitioners detailed several other grievances regarding the unfair treatment that they allegedly faced.

During the proceedings, the SC called for the mark sheets of the candidates who appeared for the interviews to examine the facts. In delivering the judgment, the CJ noted that while the petitioners claimed that the PSC had altered the marks, the Secretary to the PSC had provided a clear explanation to the Court regarding the reasons for those changes. The Court stated that it was satisfied with the explanation and recognised the process as lawful. The judgment further noted that the arguments presented by the petitioners lacked legal merit and that they had failed to prove a violation of their FR before the Court. Accordingly, the SC dismissed the petitions without costs, stating that there were no reasonable grounds to grant the relief sought by the petitioners.



More News..