Supreme Court of India Judgements

47000 Judgements hosted as on 30/12/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Service

Service Matters
Service

CSIR’s argument that respondent no. 1 was not graded as ‘Good’ whereas respondent nos. 2 & 3 were graded as ‘Very Good’ was irrelevant because the promotion of respondent nos. 2 & 3 had been interfered with by the High Court holding them to be ineligible for the post – In view of the above facts, the Court held that the action of the appellant-CSIR in denying promotion to respondent no. 1 upon the post of Under Secretary was rightly reversed by the High Court.

Feb 4, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DIRECTOR GENERAL, COUNCIL OF SCIENTIFIC AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH(CSIR) — Appellant Vs. J.K. PRASHAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and…

Service Matters
Service

Assam Police Act, 2007 – Section 14(2) – Assam Police Manual – Rule 63(iii) – Deputy Commissioner would not be competent to assess the overall performance of Superintendent of Police (SP) – Rule 63(iii) of Assam Police Manual invalid on the ground that it is in direct conflict with Section 14(2) of the Assam Police Act, 2007

Jan 21, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. BINOD KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay Kumar, JJ.…

Service Matters
Service

Service Law – Recovery of personal/promotional pay scale benefits – Benefit of a personal/promotional pay scale was granted to Appellants/Ayurvedic Medical Officers by the State of Uttarakhand – Benefit was withdrawn under a subsequent decision of the State of Uttarakhand – By the order dated 8th November 2006, the personal time-bound pay scale was granted to the appellants, subject to the condition that if the Government takes any decision to the contrary, the amount will be recovered from the salary of the concerned medical officers – Recovery order upheld – Appeal dismissed.

Jan 14, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DR. BALBIR SINGH BHANDARI — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal,…

Service Matters
Service

The state argued the forgery was serious misconduct and made appointments illegal – The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and ruled that the appellants were entitled to continue in their service – The court found no evidence of wrongdoing by the Appellants and directed the State to pay the appellants’ salaries with arrears and continue their service.

Jan 11, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RADHEY SHYAM YADAV AND ANOTHER ETC — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and K.V. Viswanathan,…

Constitution Service

Article 229 of the Constitution does not grant the Chief Justice the power to make rules regarding the post-retiral benefits of former judges – The State Government has the legislative power to make laws regarding the post-retiral benefits of its employees, including former High Court judges.

Jan 3, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. ASSOCIATION OF RETIRED SUPREME COURT AND HIGH COURT JUDGES AT ALLAHABAD AND OTHERS —…

Service Matters
Service

The appellant had filled in 08.12.1997 as his date of birth, while his actual date of birth is 18.12.1997 – SCOI allowed the appeal, holding that the error in the application form was a trivial error and did not justify the cancellation of the appellant’s candidature: – The Supreme Court’s reasoning is based on the following principles: a. De minimis non curat lex – The law does not concern itself with trifles. b. Candidacy cancellation for trivial errors is not justified. c. No prejudice caused to the state due to the error.

Jan 3, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VASHIST NARAYAN KUMAR — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ. )…

Service Matters
Service

HELD it may be recorded here that subsequent to date, there was a chargesheet issued against the Respondent and ultimately, the entire proceedings came to be dropped on 11.12.2019. Since the eligibility conditions in Rule 9 (1)(a)(iii), the validity of which is not under challenge before us, requires us to limit our inquiry into the question of eligibility as on date of consideration, what happens after that becomes insignificant to the inquiry. – In the background of facts and position of law analysed here in, it has to be concluded that as on the date of consideration, disciplinary action was contemplated against the writ petitioner Dinesh Singh, and therefore he was rightly held to be ineligible for selection of his name in Register A-1.

Dec 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. DINESH SINGH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.M. Sundresh and Aravind Kumar, JJ. )…

Service Matters
Service

Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 – Sections 14 and 31(1) – Formation of policy – Jurisdiction – A Tribunal functioning within the strict boundaries of the governing legislation, would not have the power to direct the formation of a policy – it cannot be questioned that disputes in respect of promotions and/or filling up of vacancies is within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, it cannot direct those responsible for making policy, to make a policy in a particular manner.

Dec 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. AIR COMMODORE NK SHARMA (17038) ADM/LGL — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay…

Service Matters
Service

Service Law – Transfer Order – A person aggrieved by the order of transfer cannot sit at home and decide on his own that the order is illegal or erroneous and he will not comply with the same – If the workman had any grievance, he could have availed of his remedy available against the same; otherwise, he was duty-bound to comply with the same

Dec 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH U.P. SINGH — Appellant Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK — Respondent ( Before : Hima Kohli and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 5494…

You missed

Constitution

Passports Act, 1967 — Sections 5, 6(2)(f), 7, 8, 9, 10, and 22 — Refusal to issue or re-issue a passport due to pending criminal proceedings — Exemption under Section 22 via Notification GSR 570(E) dated 25.08.1993 — Section 6(2)(f) bars issuance if criminal proceedings are pending, but this is subject to “other provisions of this Act,” including Section 22 — GSR 570(E) exempts persons facing criminal proceedings if they obtain permission from the concerned criminal court — This exemption is structured, tying validity and use to the court’s order; it permits issuing a passport where the criminal court allows renewal and retains judicial supervision over foreign travel. (Paras 7.2, 7.6, 7.8, 8, 9, 10, 12, 15, 25)

Dec 30, 2025 sclaw
Service

Cochin University of Science and Technology Act, 1986 — Section 31(10) and 31(11) — Selection and Appointment — Validity of Rank List and Communal Rotation — Harmonious Construction — Section 31(10) stipulates that the Rank List remains valid for two years, and vacancies arising during this period “shall be filled up from the list so published” — Section 31(11) mandates that “Communal rotation shall be followed category-wise” — These sub-sections operate in distinct spheres but are not mutually exclusive; the Rank List’s validity period (Sub-sec 10) co-exists with the mandatory application of communal rotation (Sub-sec 11) for every appointment made therefrom — Interpreting Sub-section (11) as becoming operative only after the Rank List expires would render the reservation/rotation requirement otiose during the list’s validity, defeating legislative intent and violating the doctrine of harmonious construction. (Paras 5, 5.2, 5.4, 5.5, 5.5.1, 5.5.2

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw
Acquittal I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) —Section 302 read with Sections 149 and 148 — Murder —Conviction affirmed by High Court — Appeal to Supreme Court — Sufficiency of evidence — Role of interested/related witnesses — Deposition of PW-4 (mother of deceased and alleged eyewitness) scrutinized closely — Material contradictions found in PW-4’s evidence regarding the manner of assault and who informed her — Failure of prosecution to examine key witness (deceased’s granddaughter, who initially informed PW-4) — Independent witnesses (PW-1, PW-2, PW-3 and PW-9) turned hostile — Recovery of weapons based on accused’s memorandum/statement rendered unreliable when supporting witnesses hostile. (Paras 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15)

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw
Constitution

Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 — Section 45A — Determination of contributions in certain cases — Preconditions for invoking Section 45A — Section 45A is a special provision for best-judgment assessment applicable only when an employer fails to submit, furnish, or maintain returns, particulars, registers, or records as required by Section 44, OR obstructs an Inspector or official in discharging duties under Section 45 — It is not an alternative mode of assessment available at the option of the Corporation — When records (ledgers, cash books, vouchers, etc.) are produced and the employer cooperates by attending multiple personal hearings, the mere allegation of inadequacy or deficiency of supporting documents does not satisfy the statutory threshold of “non-production” or “obstruction” to invoke Section 45A — Mere inadequacy of records does not confer jurisdiction under Section 45A. (Paras 14.6, 14.7, 24, 25, 27, 30)

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw