Supreme Court of India Judgements

47295 Judgements hosted as on 11/10/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe @ Rs 99/- for 6 months, sclaw@sclaw.in, WA +91 9417245693.

Category: Service

Service Matters
Service

Armed Forces — Air Force Order No. 33/2017 — Prior Permission for Civil Post — Mandatory Nature — Requirement of seeking prior permission before applying for a civil post, and subsequent grant of NOC, held mandatory and not merely procedural/directory, since AFO 33/2017 has necessary nexus with regulating premature discharge of Airmen and its object of maintaining operational preparedness of the Air Force.

Jul 30, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 758 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NAKHAT SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Service Matters
Service

Public Service Commission consultation before extending officiating appointment is directory not mandatory; ad-hoc service counts towards seniority computation. A. Uttaranchal Civil Services (Executive Branch) Rules, 2005 — Rule 24(4) — Uttaranchal Public Service Commission (Limitations of Functions) Regulations, 2003 — Regulation 5(a) — Nature of Requirement — Requirement of consulting Commission before continuation of officiating appointment beyond one year held directory, not mandatory, applying the classic test of statutory construction; non-compliance does not invalidate the appointment where treating it as void would cause serious inconvenience to persons with no control over the defaulting authority.

Jul 30, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 759 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Vs. JAGDISH CHANDRA KANDPAL AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ. )…

Service Matters
Service

Reinstated judicial officer entitled to Selection/Super Time Scale despite missing ACRs; employer cannot benefit from its own wrongful discharge. A. Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010 — Rules 49, 50 — Full Court Resolution dated 15.01.2011 — Selection Scale/Super Time Scale — Application on facts — Applying the valid ACRs for 2013 and 2014 (Parts I & II) — all rated “Very Good”/”Good” with integrity certified — the Judicial Officer, having completed five years’ notional service considering reinstatement with continuity, was held entitled to Selection Scale with effect from 16.07.2018 and, upon three years therein, Super Time Scale with effect from 16.07.2021, aligned with the dates of eligibility applied to junior officers.

Jul 30, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 762 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN Vs. ABHAY JAIN ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, JJ. ) Miscellaneous Application…

Service Matters
Service

Service Law — Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS) — Grade Pay convergence — Effect on promotions within cadre — Convergence of Grade Pay pursuant to Sixth Central Pay Commission does not obliterate separate identity of promotional posts within a cadre — Promotions carry promotional increments, enhanced running-duty allowances and post-specific benefits, remaining financially meaningful notwithstanding constancy of Grade Pay.

Jul 25, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 739 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. HARBANS LAL VERMA ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih, JJ. ) Civil…

Service Matters
Service

Fixation of cut-off marks not provided under the 2014 Recruitment Rules, resulting in vacancies remaining unfilled despite eligible candidates, held arbitrary and unsustainable. – Uttar Pradesh Industrial Training Institutes (Instructors) Service Rules, 2014 — Rules 9(B), 16(3)(a)(iii) and 17(3) — Craft Instructor Training Scheme (CITS) certificate reduced from essential to preferential qualification — Challenge thereto — Appellants having participated in selection process without objection, held estopped from challenging validity of 2014 Rules or advertisements issued thereunder — Doctrine of approbation and reprobation applied.

Jul 25, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 741 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ARVIND KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, JJ. )…

Service Matters
Service

Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 — Section 59(d), 92 and 95(1) — Delhi Municipal Corporation Service (Control and Appeal) Regulations, 1959 — Regn. 7, Schedule — Disciplinary Authority — Competency of Commissioner to dismiss Group ‘A’ Officer — Substitution of Section 59(d) by Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 1993, w.e.f. 01.10.1993 — Legislative Intent — Post-1993 amendment, the Commissioner is put in complete control both as the appointing authority and the disciplinary authority — Phrase “subject to any regulation that may be made in this behalf” used in Section 59(d) refers to regulations that may be made in future and not the existing 1959 Regulations — Commissioner held fully competent to pass dismissal orders against Group ‘A’ officers despite old regulations naming the ‘Corporation’ as the disciplinary authority.

Jun 18, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 646 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJESH SHARMA Vs. NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Manoj Misra, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Service Matters
Service

Constitution of India, 1950 — Art. 16 and 226 — Public Employment — Direct Recruitment — Eligibility Criteria — Workshop Experience — Pendency of workshop renewal applications — Effect on candidates — Where a recruitment notification mandates a minimum of one year of experience in a Government-approved workshop, candidates cannot be prejudiced or disqualified merely because the workshop’s application for renewal of approval was pending with the State authorities during the period they gained experience — Depriving an otherwise eligible candidate of employment due to an administrative “period of eclipse” or delay on the part of state machinery is arbitrary and discriminatory–Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Haryana, 1985 INSC 137, relied on; State of Uttar Pradesh v. Atul Kumar Dwivedi, 2022 INSC 24, Distinguished.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 645 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH S. SENTHIL KUMARAN BOSE Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar,…

Service Matters
Service

Disciplinary proceedings — Dismissal from service — Competence of authority — Employee appointed by Superintending Engineer, dismissed by Executive Engineer — Dismissal order held valid as Executive Engineer was competent under MSEDCL Service Regulations to punish an employee of Appellant’s pay grade — Article 311 of Constitution not applicable as Appellant did not hold a civil post under Union or State.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 639 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUREKHA DOMAJI BELE Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TESTING DIVISION, MSEDCL ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Civil…

Compassionate Appointment Service

Service Law — Compassionate appointment — Nature — Not a vested right — Compassionate appointment is not a condition of service; it is a humane response to sudden financial destitution caused by death-in-harness of the breadwinner — Claim is subject to fulfilment of all eligibility requirements under the applicable rules — However, the same principle that binds the claimant equally binds the State: refusal or deferment of a claim must be grounded in a provision actually applicable to the form of relief claimed, tested on the anvil of Art. 14.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 640 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ATUL CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

You missed

Election Laws Municipal Laws

Supreme Court Dismisses Andhra Pradesh Govt Plea Against HC Quashing 34% Backward Class Quota In Local Body Elections

Oct 11, 2026 sclaw
Cr P C

Procedural Violation Will Not Vitiate Seizure But Can Affect Evidentiary Value

Oct 11, 2026 sclaw
Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Cr P C

Victim Also Has Right To Seek Speedy Trial Like Accused

Oct 11, 2026 sclaw
Arbitration

Once Prima Facie Existence Of Arbitration Agreement Shown, Dispute Must Be Referred To Arbitration

Oct 11, 2026 sclaw