Real judgements, distilled
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.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1094
An older qualification must still satisfy the eligibility rules governing the appointment sought. Here, the certificate's early date did not secure reinstatement, and rejection of eligibility should not be confused with a conclusive finding that the certificate was forged.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1095
A party benefiting from a conditional stay must meet its deposit requirement or face enforcement. The additional ₹15 crore deposit secures the pending dispute; it does not settle the land's final compensation or amount to an immediate payment to the landowners.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1093
An alleged attempt to kill does not become a lesser offence simply because the victim avoided a fatal injury. Restoring this charge means the accusation must be tried; it does not establish that the accused is guilty.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1090
For the assessment in this case, assistance reducing ordinary manufacturing costs was taxable even though the government wanted to encourage industry. The purpose and actual operation of the particular subsidy mattered more than its general development label.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1091
Proof that someone caused a serious injury does not by itself prove the additional ingredients of robbery. A court can substitute a lesser offence supported by the evidence; the sentencing reduction here depended on Appa's particular circumstances.
Special Leave Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1092
Someone challenging an election must ensure that the personal-presentation requirement is met and can be proved. Merely entering the court building does not establish compliance, and a filing defect can end the challenge before the election allegations are examined.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1088
An employee who retires on 30 June may be entitled to the increment that falls due on 1 July after completing a year of service. Authorities that delay paying the amounts due must pay interest after the deadline set by the court.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1089
Recruitment must follow the qualifications stated in the advertisement and the governing Recruitment Rules. A court will not override a merit-based eligibility decision made under those rules merely because the candidate concerned was higher in the written test.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8797
A person who occupied property only because of employment has no independent right to remain once the employment and decree end. Even when a petition fails, courts can make practical arrangements to let a person recover personal belongings.
14543 more judgements for members
You're seeing the newest cases. Log in — it's free — to keep scrolling, search by name or judge, and filter by court or legal area.
Log in to see moreFive appellants were appointed in 2002 as Additional District and Sessions Judges in Tamil Nadu's Fast Track Courts, created under the Eleventh Finance Commission scheme, after being selected from practising advocates. They served between roughly 9 and 10+ years before being relieved, either on attaining 60 years of age or because the Fast Track Courts were discontinued. When they later sought pension, gratuity, and leave encashment, the Madras High Court rejected their claims, holding that Fast Track Courts were not a "pensionable establishment" and that the appellants were only contractual appointees.
The Supreme Court held that all three reasons given by the High Court for denying benefits were unsustainable. The appellants' posts were sanctioned by government order within the regular judicial establishment and paid from the same budget head as other Additional District Judges, so they were on a "pensionable establishment." Their appointment letters and the recruitment notification described the posts as "ad hoc," not "contractual", and ad hoc and contractual appointments are legally distinct categories, with ad hoc appointees holding against sanctioned posts. Applying the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 (including the rule allowing addition of one-fourth of service length for Bar recruits), the Court found all five appellants had completed the requisite ten years of qualifying service. It accordingly set aside the High Court's judgment and directed superannuation pension for the two appellants who retired on attaining 60, compensation pension for the other three whose posts were discontinued, along with gratuity and leave encashment (up to 240 days) for all, to be paid within two months with 7% interest on delay.
Being labelled "ad hoc" or "temporary" does not automatically disqualify a government employee from pension: what matters is whether the post itself was created within a pensionable establishment and whether the employee completed the qualifying years of service; employers cannot defeat retiral dues merely by mischaracterizing the nature of the appointment.
