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 LawDelhi High Court

Binod Kumar Singh vs. Central Sanskrit University, formerly Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan & Ors.

Writ Petition (Civil) · 2026:DHC:7902Decided 10 Sept 2026New Delhi Bench
W.P.(C) 6791/2022CNR: DLHC010164802022
Justice Sanjeev Narula

Background

The petitioner moved from a government body (NIEPA) to Central Sanskrit University (CSU) as Registrar on a tenure contract that expressly let him keep his old government pension scheme, with his earlier years of service counted for pension purposes once NIEPA transferred the corresponding money to CSU, which NIEPA did, and CSU accepted. Years later, after his removal (subsequently softened by an earlier court order into a "termination simpliciter" without stigma), CSU refused to pay him pension or gratuity, calling him a mere contractual employee covered by a different, lower provident-fund scheme, and tried unsuccessfully to send the transferred money back to NIEPA.

Decision Breakdown

The Court held that CSU was bound by the written terms of the Service Agreement and its own 2014 memorandum, both of which recorded that the petitioner would continue under the old pension scheme with his past service counted, and CSU had already accepted the corresponding funds from NIEPA, fulfilling the one condition the agreement required. CSU could not now use old disciplinary allegations (already neutralized by the earlier court order) to strip him of pension rights, nor treat him as a lesser "CPF" employee after having treated him as a pension employee for years. The Court directed CSU to compute and pay his pension, gratuity, provident fund (adjusting sums already paid), and notice pay, with specified interest for the delay, and to correct his service records.

Lesson Learnt

An employer that accepts a transferred pension fund and formally records an employee's continuation in the old pension scheme cannot later relabel that employee as merely contractual to avoid paying pension and gratuity: retiral benefits are a legal entitlement, not a favour, and unexplained delay in paying them attracts interest.

Binod Kumar Singh vs. Central Sanskrit University, formerly Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware