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

June 12, 2026 8:08 pm

Dispute over cadre change versus mere transfer — A transfer is a change of posting within the same service without altering seniority or substantive status, differing from a cadre change which involves a structural shift between services with significant implications for seniority and promotional avenues, requiring specific authority.

Apr 28, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 404 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJENDRA SINGH BORA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Civil…

Service

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.…

You missed

SARFAESI

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 — Auction Sale — Compliance with Rule 9 — Mandatory Nature — Payment of Balance 75% Beyond 15-Day Period — No Written Agreement for Extension — Sale Set Aside — Article 142 — Redemption Opportunity Granted to Legal Heirs of Deceased Guarantor.

Jun 12, 2026 sclaw

Cr P C

Third Judge under S. 392 CrPC cannot disturb unanimous Division Bench findings; reference confined to disagreed accused only.–Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 392 — Third Judge — Power to give independent opinion — Options available — When an appeal is heard by a Division Bench and the Judges are divided in opinion, the appeal is laid before a third Judge under S. 392 — The third Judge is not confined to choosing between the two views expressed by the Division Bench Judges — The third Judge may: (i) agree with either of the two opinions expressed; (ii) form an independent view at divergence with both opinions; or (iii) where warranted, receive additional evidence under S. 391 before forming an opinion — The opinion of the third Judge governs and the judgment follows therefrom.

Jun 12, 2026 sclaw

Constitution Service

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226(1) — Territorial jurisdiction — Writ petition by CAPF personnel — Delhi High Court — Jurisdiction based on situs of respondent’s office —The Delhi High Court has territorial jurisdiction under Art. 226(1) of the Constitution to entertain a writ petition preferred by any enrolled member of the Border Security Force or any Central Armed Police Force (CAPF) who is aggrieved by an administrative order of termination of service, by reason of the situs of the offices of the Union of India and the Director General of the concerned CAPF in New Delhi — and this jurisdictional competence subsists notwithstanding that the impugned order of termination was issued from a place outside the territorial limits of the Delhi High Court and that no part of the cause of action arose within such limits — The Union of India and the Director General, BSF are necessary parties to such a writ petition by virtue of Ss. 4 and 5 of the BSF Act and the requirement under R. 22(4) of the BSF Rules that every order of dismissal/removal be reported to the Director General; there is, moreover, a presumption that official acts have been regularly performed.

Jun 12, 2026 sclaw

Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 168 — Compensation — Death of homemaker — New head of ‘Loss of Domestic Care’ — Basis and quantum — The conventional method of computing compensation upon the death of a homemaker suffers from an inherent disadvantage — Notional income, as assigned by earlier decisions, fails to capture the economic, emotional and managerial contributions that a homemaker makes to the household and to nation-building at large — In recognition of the multifarious yet unquantified roles of a homemaker — (i) contribution towards smooth functioning of the household; (ii) loss of maternal support to children; and (iii) loss of spousal/parental support — a composite sum of Rs. 30,000/- per month shall be added under the head ‘Loss of Domestic Care’ — This sum shall serve as the stand-in monthly income where the homemaker has no conventional monetary income — It shall be revised cumulatively by 10% every three years — Where the homemaker is part of the paid workforce, this head shall be in addition to the proved monthly income.

Jun 12, 2026 sclaw

Category: Service

You missed