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

Reshma Sultana vs The State of Karnataka & Ors.

Civil AppealDecided 10 May 2022
Civil Appeal No. 3484 of 2022
M.R. Shah · B.V. Nagarathna

Background

A college management ran a recruitment process in 2007 for the post of Urdu Lecturer. Ilyas Ahmed Patwegar, an existing Urdu teacher at the college, applied but the process was postponed pending expert opinion; later the management informed him that Reshma Sultana had instead been appointed. Patwegar challenged the appointment before the High Court, and the Single Judge found the entire selection process was vitiated by fraud and manipulation of records (including an interpolated/non-existent resolution), quashed Sultana's appointment, and separately directed the authorities to consider appointing Patwegar directly. The Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court upheld this, and Sultana appealed to the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court framed a narrow question: once an appointment is quashed for being fraudulent, can the court direct appointment of the rival candidate who was never actually recommended or approved through that same tainted selection process? The Court held it could not, since the entire 2007 selection process itself was found fraudulent and manipulated, no candidate (including Patwegar) could derive a valid appointment from it; the correct remedy was a fresh, lawful selection process, not handing the post to the other candidate from the same corrupted process. The Court therefore upheld the quashing of Sultana's appointment (since fraud in the appointment process was clearly established) but set aside the direction to appoint Patwegar, ordering a fresh selection to be completed within three months under the supervision of the Commissioner of Collegiate Education.

Lesson Learnt

When a selection or appointment process is found to be tainted by fraud or manipulation, courts cannot simply hand the post to the rival, unselected candidate from that same vitiated process: the only fair remedy is to annul the tainted appointment and order a fresh, transparent selection.

Reshma Sultana vs The State of Karnataka & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware