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

Sharwan Kumar Vigmal vs. The General Manager NW-I, Appointing Authority, State Bank of India

Letters Patent Appeal · 2026:DHC:7412-DBDecided 2 Sept 2026New Delhi Bench
LPA 563/2026CNR: DLHC010326522026
Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya · Justice Tejas Karia

Background

After 35 years of service, the appellant was denied promotion from MMGS-II to MMGS-III. A prior court order had directed the Bank to consider him for back-dated promotion provided he cleared a written test and interview. He appeared for the exam but was not selected, and he alleged the Bank was penalising him for having earlier gone to court, and that his marks for the relevant year were not properly disclosed.

Decision Breakdown

The Court held that a plea of mala fides is easy to allege but hard to prove, and the appellant had produced no credible evidence that the Bank acted with bad faith. It found the written test requirement was validly imposed as per the earlier court order (which had specifically rejected a waiver request), and that the Bank had properly explained how his marks were computed across different components. The appeal was dismissed as the appellant failed to show any legal flaw in the promotion process.

Lesson Learnt

An employee who has actually participated in a selection process and been unsuccessful cannot later have it overturned merely by alleging bias, without concrete proof; courts require solid evidence, not suspicion, before interfering in institutional promotion decisions.

Sharwan Kumar Vigmal vs. The General Manager NW-I, Appointing Authority, State Bank of India – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware