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 moreTwo employees of Orissa University of Agriculture and Technology, both appointed as "Field Supervisors," separately went to the Orissa High Court seeking to have their post treated as equivalent to "Teacher" for pay and service benefits. Two different Division Benches of the High Court reached opposite conclusions on this question in the 1990s, so the conflict was referred to a Full Bench, which in 2011 ruled in favour of treating Field Supervisors as Teachers. The University appealed to the Supreme Court challenging that Full Bench ruling.
The Supreme Court disagreed with the Full Bench's interpretation of the University's Statute 19, holding that Statute 19(3) did squarely apply to Field Supervisors (a "Category II" post) and that such a post could only be treated as equivalent to "Teacher" if the University itself had formally declared it so, with the Board's prior approval, not automatically. However, the Court found that the University's own Registrar had in fact issued such a declaration back in 1979 (for election purposes) and a related 1981 recommendation, neither of which had ever been withdrawn or rescinded, and that a declaration made for one purpose (elections) could validly be relied on for other purposes (pay/benefits) too. Noting that the respondents had already been fighting for their rights for nearly 30 years and had since retired, the Court upheld their entitlement to benefits as Teachers, while clarifying the University remains free to withdraw the 1979 proceeding for the future (without affecting these respondents' already-accrued rights). The appeals were disposed of on this basis.
A formal internal declaration or order by an institution, even if issued for a limited stated purpose, can still be relied upon by affected employees for other related purposes if it is never formally withdrawn or cancelled: institutions cannot informally disown their own unrescinded orders years later.
