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.

Labour & Industrial LawSupreme Court of India

Bastiram vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation & Anr.

Not available · 2024 INSC 934Decided 2 Dec 2024
Not available
Justice J.K. Maheshwari · Justice Rajesh Bindal

Background

The appellant, a bus conductor, was dismissed from service in 1982 by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation over allegations of ticketing irregularities. He challenged the dismissal by filing a civil suit rather than raising an industrial dispute, and after decades of litigation, both the trial court and the first appellate court ruled in his favour, finding the dismissal illegal for lack of a fair hearing. The High Court, however, allowed the Corporation's second appeal, holding that the civil court had no jurisdiction to hear the matter since the proper remedy lay under the Industrial Disputes Act.

Decision Breakdown

Rather than resolving the underlying jurisdictional question or sending the workman back to start over under the Industrial Disputes Act after more than three decades, the Supreme Court took a pragmatic approach. Noting that the appellant had worked for only about three years before dismissal and would by now have reached superannuation age, the Court declined to go into the merits of the jurisdiction dispute and instead awarded him a lump-sum compensation of Rs. 2,00,000 to bring the long-running litigation to a close.

Lesson Learnt

When a dispute has dragged on for decades and reopening technical jurisdictional questions would serve no practical purpose (e.g., because the worker has already reached retirement age), the Supreme Court may cut through procedural wrangling and grant a lump-sum monetary settlement to achieve a fair and final resolution.

Bastiram vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation & Anr. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware