Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Service & Administrative LawSupreme Court of India

Bahadur Singh & Ors. vs Jaspreet Kaur Talwar & Ors.

Contempt Petition (Civil)Decided 16 Aug 2022
Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 399 of 2020
Uday Umesh Lalit · S. Ravindra Bhat · Sudhanshu Dhulia

Background

These contempt petitions arose out of an earlier Supreme Court order that had disposed of a Special Leave Petition in line with the Court's judgment in State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh, which entitled certain employees to be paid at least the "minimum of the pay scale" of their category, without extra allowances attached to specific posts. A related order had earlier clarified that "minimum of the pay" includes not just basic pay and grade pay but also dearness allowance. The petitioners complained that while their basic pay dues had been settled, the dearness allowance component ordered earlier had still not been paid to them, and that even the amounts paid covered only 38 months instead of the full period owed.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court found force in the petitioners' grievance regarding non-payment of dearness allowance, which its own earlier order had already clarified was part of "minimum of the pay." It directed that the dearness allowance amounts due to all the contempt petitioners be paid within six weeks. On the separate complaint about the shortfall in the period covered, the State's counsel gave an assurance that this would be examined and appropriate relief granted if a case was made out, and on that basis the contempt petitions were disposed of.

Lesson Learnt

When a court clarifies exactly what a pay-related entitlement includes (here, that dearness allowance is part of "minimum of the pay"), authorities must actually implement that clarification in full, and courts will use their contempt jurisdiction to enforce payment of amounts that have already been judicially settled but not honoured.

Bahadur Singh & Ors. vs Jaspreet Kaur Talwar & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware