Supreme Court of India Judgements

47010 Judgements hosted as on 01/01/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Service

Service Matters
Service

Succession Act, 1925 – Section 372 – Sikkim Services (Pension) Rules, 1990 – Rule 40(6) – Family pension – Rule 40(6) is conditional in nature and does not vest an automatic statutory right in appellant no.1 to equal share in the family pension – Family pension would be payable to more than one wife only if the government servant had made a nomination to that effect and which option was open to him under the Pension Rules

Mar 8, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TULSA DEVI NIROLA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. RADHA NIROLA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and Navin Sinha, JJ. )…

Service Matters
Service

Kerala State Higher Judicial Services Special Rules, 1961 – HELD the Division Bench of the High Court has completely erred in law in holding that the appellant has delayed the challenge of his appointment vide order dated 22nd December, 2010. The appellant was appointed pursuant to a direction issued earlier by the Division Bench. The Division Bench has directed to re-cast the select list and in such select list,

Mar 8, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH C. JAYACHANDRAN — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and Hemant Gupta, JJ. ) Civil…

Service Matters
Service

Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996 HELD our opinion on the point at issue is that the norms, prevailing on the date of consideration of the application, should be the basis for consideration of claim for compassionate appointment. A dependent of a government employee, in the absence of any vested right accruing on the death of the government employee, can only demand consideration of his/her application. He is however disentitled to seek consideration in accordance with the norms as applicable, on the day of death of the government employee

Mar 8, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH N.C. SANTHOSH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi, A. S. Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ.…

Service Matters
Service

Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 – Section 1 – Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACP)- ACP Scheme which is now superseded by MACP Scheme is a matter of government policy – Interference with the recommendations of the expert body like Pay Commission and its recommendations for the MACP, would have serious impact on the public exchequer – HELD Impugned orders cannot be sustained and are liable to be set aside – Appeal allowed.

Mar 8, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M.V. MOHANAN NAIR — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi, A.S. Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ.…

Service Matters
Service

HELD Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Services – Judicial review – Dismissal – Disciplinary action – Natural suspicion as to the integrity and honesty of the appellant in several land acquisition cases – Held, There is no explicit mention of any extraneous consideration being actually received or of unbecoming conduct on the part of the appellant – The order of dismissal dated 17.01.2006 passed by Respondent No. 1 is set-aside, and the appellant’s prayers for reinstatement with consequential benefits including retiral benefits, is accepted.

Mar 7, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SADHNA CHAUDHARY — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : S.A. Bobde, CJI , B.R. Gavai and Surya Kant,…

Service Matters
Service

Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1960 – Regulations 39(1), 39(4)(i) and 39(4) – Penalty imposed on employee on the grounds of conduct which had led to a conviction on a criminal charge – Where the respondent was convicted of various criminal offences and subsequently, a notice to show cause was issued – HELD DB of high court was in error to hold the action on notice pending, decision of criminal appeal

Feb 26, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. MUKESH POONAMCHAND SHAH — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Hemant Gupta, JJ.…

Service Matters
Service

HELD that where the initial appointment is only ad hoc and not according to Rules and made as a stop gap arrangement, the officiation in such post cannot be taken into account for determining seniority. It was further held that the period of officiation can be counted if the initial appointment is not made by following the procedure laid down by the Rules but the appointees continued in the post uninterruptedly till the regularisation of his service in accordance with the Rules

Feb 17, 2020 sclaw

UPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VINOD GIRI GOSWAMI AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and Deepak…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 read with 34, 148, and 341 — Murder —Appeal against reversal of acquittal — Appellate court’s duty in overturning acquittal — Trial court’s acquittal based on “imaginary and illusionary reasons” and misappreciation of evidence, including attributing undue significance to minor contradictions and perceived manipulation of delayed FIR submission, justifies reversal by High Court. (Paras 31, 45, 46, 52)

Jan 1, 2026 sclaw
Service

Service Law — Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) Rules, 2001 — Rule 18(b) — Recruitment: Disqualification — Second Marriage — Rule 18(b) disqualifies a person who, having a spouse living, has entered into or contracted a marriage with another person from appointment to the Force — Respondent, a CISF Constable, was dismissed from service for marrying a second time while his first marriage subsisted, violating Rule 18(b) — Held, the rule is a service condition intended to maintain discipline, public confidence, and integrity in the Force, and is not a moral censure — The rule is clear and mandatory, and the maxim “dura lex sed lex” (the law is hard, but it is the law) applies — The statutory rule prescribing penal consequences must be strictly construed — Dismissal upheld. (Paras 2, 3, 7, 9)

Jan 1, 2026 sclaw
I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 366A, 372, 373, 34 — Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (ITPA) — Section 3, 4, 5, 6 — Child Trafficking and Commercial Sexual Exploitation — Evidence of Minor Victim — Appreciation of Evidence — Concurrent findings of fact by Trial Court and High Court regarding conviction for procuring and sexually exploiting a minor victim upheld — Prosecution case substantially corroborated by testimony of minor victim (PW-13), decoy witness (PW-8), independent witness (PW-12), and recovery of incriminating articles — Minor contradictions in testimony (e.g., about forcible sexual intercourse causing injury, or apartment topography) do not vitiate the prosecution case, as the consistent version of the victim establishes procurement for sexual exploitation. (Paras 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13)

Jan 1, 2026 sclaw
Bail Declined Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 439(2) — Cancellation of Bail — Annulment of Bail — Distinction — Cancellation of bail is generally based on supervening circumstances and post-bail misconduct; Annulment of an order granting bail is warranted when the order is vitiated by perversity, illegality, arbitrariness, or non-application of mind — High Court granted bail ignoring prior cancellation of bail due to commission of murder by accused (while on bail) of a key witness in the first case, and failed to consider the gravity of offenses (including under SC/ST (POA) Act) and threat to fair trial — Such omissions and reliance on irrelevant considerations (existence of civil dispute) render the bail order perverse and unsustainable, justifying annulment by the Supreme Court. (Paras 12, 12.1, 12.2, 12.4, 12.5)

Jan 1, 2026 sclaw