Service Archives - Page 3 of 92 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

June 4, 2026 7:42 pm

Recruitment Rules and Advertisement — Essential Qualifications — Work Experience — In absence of a specific rule or advertisement provision, a recruiting agency cannot relax essential eligibility criteria by treating a higher qualification as a replacement for a mandatory essential qualification — A preference for a higher qualification operates only for eligible and meritorious candidates and does not override or supplant the primary requirement of essential eligibility.

Apr 25, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 391 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HIMAKSHI Vs. RAHUL VERMA AND OTHERS ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 5942…

Service

Public Employment — Recruitment — Medical Unfitness — Suppression of Material Facts — A candidate found medically unfit for a post, specifically for knock knees, cannot retain an appointment if this vital fact was suppressed, especially when the initial appointment and subsequent reinstatement were based on either flawed processes or non-disclosure of disqualifying conditions — The principle of “fraud unravels everything” applies, and an appointment vitiated by the suppression of a disqualifying medical condition cannot be sustained.

Apr 25, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 394 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS Vs. AJAY KUMAR MALIK ( Before : Ahsanuddin Amanullah and N. V. Anjaria, JJ. )…

Service

Regularisation of contractual/ad hoc employees — Notifications dated 16.06.2014 and 18.06.2014, which sought to regularise the services of Group ‘B’, ‘C’, and ‘D’ employees were found to be valid as they aimed to provide benefits to employees left out from a previous regularisation policy and had clear criteria for eligibility such as working on sanctioned posts and possessing necessary qualifications.

Apr 19, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 379 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MADAN SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkarm, JJ.…

Service

Air Force Act, 1950 — Section 19 — Air Force Rules, 1969 — Rule 16 — Administrative action after discharge from criminal court — Initiation of administrative action for disciplinary purposes is not permissible if the matter has already been decided by a criminal court by way of discharge, as discharge signifies no sufficient grounds for proceeding, placing the individual on a better footing than acquittal and thus ending the matter.

Apr 16, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 366 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH EX. SQN. LDR. R. SOOD Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Dipankar Datta and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ. )…

Service

Uttar Pradesh Civil Services (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1981 — Rule 4 — Sanction of Governor for award — Extraordinary pension award requires sanction of the Governor, who exercises administrative discretion based on the rules — The Supreme Court held that the authority on whom the power to take a decision is conferred should be the one to take it, especially when the rules enumerate the considerations — The Court would be slow to substitute its own decision unless the authority has refused to decide or the decision is arbitrary — In such cases, a direction to the authority to decide afresh would be more appropriate than the Court substituting its own decision.

Apr 12, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 337 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Vs. SARITA SINGH AND OTHERS ( Before : J.K.Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Service

Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Economically Weaker Sections) Act, 2020 — Advertisement dated 15.12.2021 for 9212 posts of Health Worker (Female) — Economically Weaker Section (EWS) reservation — Clause 8.3 of advertisement requiring candidates to submit EWS certificate issued till the last date of application or advertisement — Prescribed proforma requires certificate to be for the financial year preceding the year of application — Certificates submitted by appellants were not in respect of the correct financial year or were issued before the closure of the relevant financial year — Certificates thus invalid for claiming EWS reservation — High Court rightly dismissed the claim — Appeals dismissed.

Apr 12, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 351 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH POONAM DWIVEDI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ( Before : Manoj Misra and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ. )…

Constitution Service

Contitution of India — Articles 14 & 16 — Equality in employment — Denial of promotion on discriminatory grounds — Appellant denied promotion despite long service, experience, and possessing a qualification that was accepted for similarly situated employees — High Court Division Bench erroneously set aside Single Judge’s order granting relief, creating contradiction in reasoning by first stating discretion lies with Board of Directors and then upholding Registrar’s refusal — Supreme Court allowed appeal, finding non-acceptance of promotion unsustainable and a violation of equality principles.

Apr 12, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 353 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KAMAL PRASAD DUBEY Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and N.V. Anjaria, JJ.…

Service

Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008; Seventh Central Pay Commission Recommendations — Non-Functional Upgradation (NFU) to Level 9 — Recommendation 7.4.13 (iv) (b) — Eligibility criteria — Completion of four years in Level 8 on seniority-cum-suitability basis — Interpretation of — Held, denial of NFU on the ground that Junior Engineers did not enter service at Grade Pay of Rs — 4,800/- amounts to adding an additional condition not contemplated by the recommendation.

Apr 6, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 311 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. SUNIL KUMAR RAI AND OTHERS ( Before : Pankaj Mithal and S.V.N. Bhatti, JJ. )…

Service

Service Law — Dismissal from Service — Disciplinary Proceedings — Violation of Natural Justice — Requirement of Oral Enquiry — Employer’s Burden of Proof — The Apex Court held that unless the charged employee clearly admits guilt, a disciplinary enquiry must be held — The employer must first present evidence and witnesses, allowing the employee to cross-examine — Only then should the employee be given an opportunity to present their defense — The Court emphasized that relying solely on documents without examining witnesses or making them available for cross-examination when charges are denied, vitiates the enquiry.

Apr 5, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 305 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JAI PRAKASH SAINI Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR, U.P. COOPERATIVE FEDERATION LTD. AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Manoj Misra, JJ.…

Service

Service Law — Disciplinary proceedings — Punishment — Judicial review — The court’s power to review punishment is limited and generally does not allow substitution of its own judgment for that of the disciplinary authority unless the punishment is illogical, suffers from procedural impropriety, or shocks the conscience of the court

Apr 3, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 313 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PUNJAB AND SIND BANK Vs. SH. RAJ KUMAR ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

You missed

Service

Service Law — Promotion — Entitlement to promotion to Chief Medical Director (Higher Administrative Grade) in Indian Railway Medical Service — Appellant was denied promotion despite being eligible, with a junior officer being promoted instead — Appellant’s case was rejected by the Tribunal and High Court based on her grading in Annual Confidential Reports

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 29A — Mandate of Arbitrator — Extension of mandate — In the absence of specific statutory provisions, party autonomy and minimal judicial intervention are guiding principles — If a party participates in proceedings and does not object to the extension of mandate, they may be estopped from challenging the award on that ground after it is passed.

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) — Section 33 and Section 34(3) — Limitation for filing application to set aside arbitral award — Exclusion of time spent in disposal of applications under Section 33 — Court held that period spent in disposal of Section 33 applications by Arbitral Tribunal must be excluded for computing limitation under Section 34(3) of the Act, regardless of whether the Section 33 applications were ultimately allowed or dismissed.

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14, 15(1), 16, 39(a) & 39(c) — Uttar Pradesh Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016 (2016 Order) — Clause 2(p) — Government Order (G.O.) No — 6 of 2019 — Paragraph IV(10) — Exclusion of married daughter from definition of ‘family’ for compassionate appointment as fair price shop dealer — Held, exclusion is based on gender stereotypes and lacks rational nexus with the object of the scheme, violating Articles 14 and 15(1) of the Constitution — Marital status cannot be the sole criterion for dependency — Dependency is a question of fact.

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw

Category: Service

You missed