Supreme Court of India Judgements

37260 Judgements hosted as on 18/06/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Service

Service Matters
Constitution Service

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act) — Disability — Mental Illness and Specific Learning Disability — Post of Auditor in CAG — Identified as not suitable for persons with benchmark disabilities suffering from mental illness, but later identified as suitable for Group C posts of Assistant (Audit) and Auditor-II through Notification dated 4th January, 2021 — Court directs accommodation in suitable Group C posts.

Mar 14, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 232 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUDHANSHU KARDAM Vs. COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. )…

Service Matters
Constitution Service

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 311(2) second proviso (b) — Dismissal from service without departmental inquiry — Requirement of reasonable practicability — Mere presumption or belief by disciplinary authority not sufficient — Must be based on objective facts and material on record. Article 311(2) second proviso (b) — Dispensing with departmental inquiry — Decision of disciplinary authority not binding on courts; subject to judicial review — Reasons for dispensing must be plausible and based on definite material.

Mar 14, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 234 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANOHAR LAL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND OTHERS ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Service Matters
Service

Kerala Technical Education Service (Amendment) Rules, 2004 — Rule 6A — Exemption from PhD requirement — Rule 6A(i) and (ii) — Validity — Supreme Court judgment in Christy James Jose v. State of Kerala (2016) held appointments not contrary to AICTE qualifications and Special Rule 6-A(2) in tune with AICTE Notification dated 18-2-2003 — AICTE Regulations on qualifications are binding on State Rules to the extent of repugnancy — Rule 6A had no application after 05-03-2010 when AICTE issued new regulations mandating PhD for promotion to Professor, Associate Professor, and Principal posts.

Mar 4, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 207 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DR. JIJI K.S. AND OTHERS Vs. SHIBU K AND OTHERS ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Aravind Kumar, JJ. ) Civil…

Service Matters
Service

Service Law — Regularisation of Services — Casual Workers — Supreme Court held that casual workers who were similarly situated to those whose services had been regularised in previous judgments, should also have their services regularised. The Court noted that the work performed was perennial and fundamental to the functioning of the department, and that excluding these workers amounted to discrimination.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 156 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PAWAN KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. )…

Service Matters
Service

University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026 — Clause 3(c) defining “Caste-based Discrimination” — Incorporation argued as restrictive and exclusionary — Claim that it renders individuals from non-reserved/general classes remediless against caste-based discrimination or institutional bias — Allegation that regulations proceed on unfounded presumption that caste-based discrimination only affects reserved categories.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MRITUNJAY TIWARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER ( Before : Surya Kant, C.J. and Joymalya Bagchi, J. ) Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 101/2026 with…

Service Matters
Service

Service Law — Recruitment and Appointment — Suppression of Criminal Antecedents — Candor and Integrity — Application forms (Attestation and Verification Forms) required disclosure of pending criminal cases — Applicant answered in the negative despite two criminal cases pending against him (Case Crime Nos. 198/2019 and 215/2018) — Non-disclosure was repeated (in both forms) and therefore held to reflect deliberate concealment/mal-intent, striking at the core of trust required for public service — Suppression was a violation of clear stipulations/disclaimers in the forms making concealment a disqualification/render applicant unfit for government service — Subsequent voluntary disclosure (via affidavit) or later acquittal/dropping of proceedings do not nullify the fact that candidate provided incorrect and false information at the time of filling the forms — High Court erred in overlooking the repeated concealment and calling the undisclosed information ‘of trivial nature’ — Cancellation of appointment upheld. (Paras 3, 6, 8, 9)

Jan 18, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 49 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER Vs. DINESH KUMAR ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Service Matters
Service

Public Service Commission — Recruitment — Waiting List — Validity — A waiting list has a limited validity period, usually determined by recruitment rules or a reasonable period until the next advertisement. Candidates on a waiting list do not have an indefeasible right to appointment, but can be considered if vacancies arise within the validity period and the appointing authority acts arbitrarily.

Jan 17, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 64 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJASTHAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, AJMER Vs. YATI JAIN AND OTHERS ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, JJ. )…

Service Matters
Service

Bihar Pharmacists Cadre Rules, 2014 (as amended in 2024) — Rule 6(1) and Note in Appendix-I — Constitutional validity — Fixation of minimum qualification for recruitment of Pharmacist — Held valid — “Note” providing Bachelor’s/Master’s degree holders are eligible subject to possession of Diploma is not arbitrary or exclusionary — Supreme Court upheld the validity of the amended Cadre Rules, finding no infirmity in the reasoning or conclusion of the High Court. (Paras 2, 16, 41, 65)

Jan 17, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 68 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MD. FIROZ MANSURI AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS ( Before : M. M. Sundresh and Satish Chandra…

You missed

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
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
RTI

Right to Information Act, 2005 — S. 24(4) — Madhya Pradesh Special Police Establishment Act, 1947 — S. 2(1), S. 3 — “Intelligence and Security Organisation” — Scope and Applicability of Exemption — Jurisdiction of Special Police Establishment (SPE) — The expression “intelligence and security organisations” under Section 24 of the RTI Act implies that the concerned entity must be statutory or institutionally empowered to handle matters of intelligence and national/state security — The Special Police Establishment (SPE) of Madhya Pradesh, established under Section 2(1) of the Act of 1947, is clothed with a limited jurisdiction restricted strictly to investigating offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and select economic/fraud offenses under Sections 409, 420, and Chapter XVIII of the Indian Penal Code — Because neither the Lokayukt nor the SPE handles matters connected to general ‘intelligence’ and ‘security’, the SPE cannot be deemed an “intelligence and security organisation” under Section 24(4) of the RTI Act — Principle of institutional parity cannot be invoked to grant blanket exemptions to a anti-corruption investigation agency.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 11, Explanation IV — Constructive Res Judicata — Application of the principle depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, considering the ambit of earlier proceedings and the nexus of the matter to the controversy — It is founded on public policy to prevent multiplicity of proceedings and avoid parties being vexed twice over for the same litigation — Parties are expected to exercise reasonable diligence and bring forward every point that properly belonged to the subject of litigation and which they might and ought to have brought forward — Negligence, inadvertence, or accident in omitting a part of the case does not exempt from its application.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw