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

Reena Kumari & Ors. v. Praveer Kumar & Ors.

Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 642Decided 27 May 2026
C.A. No.-008463-008465 - 2026
Justice J.K. Maheshwari · Justice Atul S. Chandurkar

Background

Women who had worked for years as Auxiliary Nurse and Midwife (ANM) on contract sought regular appointment as Basic Health Workers (Female) in Uttar Pradesh. In 2013, the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) had directed the State to consider them for regular appointment with relaxed qualification norms, but the State failed to fully comply for over a decade, leading to review petitions, contempt proceedings, and further appeals reaching the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court found that the State had, though belatedly, now substantively complied by issuing appointment orders, and set aside the High Court's order dismissing the contempt petitions. It directed the appellants to join duty promptly and the State to facilitate this without further hurdles, while sharply criticizing the State for taking thirteen years to implement a clear judicial direction. The Court invoked the principle that contempt power exists to secure compliance, not to punish once compliance is achieved, and allowed the appeals with a symbolic cost of Rs. 1,00,000 payable to the State Legal Services Authority.

Lesson Learnt

Courts view prolonged institutional non-compliance with judicial orders as a serious matter, especially where it costs ordinary employees years of seniority and livelihood; the State, as a "model employer," is expected to honour court directions promptly rather than forcing citizens into decade-long litigation.

Reena Kumari & Ors. v. Praveer Kumar & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware