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

Sunil Kumar Yadav and Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others

Review Petition (Civil)Decided 11 Jan 2022
Review Petition (Civil) No. 32 of 2022
Uday Umesh Lalit · Ajay Rastogi

Background

The petitioners' original special leave petition, challenging an Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) order of 3 December 2019, had already been dismissed by the Supreme Court on 26 July 2021. That dispute arose from a 2012 recruitment notification, where the state was earlier directed (following the Court's decision in State of U.P. v. Shiv Kumar Pathak) to fill remaining vacancies through a fresh advertisement rather than completing the old selection process; the petitioners argued the original 2012 selection should have been carried through to completion, and also raised a fee-refund issue. Having lost on merits in July 2021, they filed this review petition asking the Court to reconsider that dismissal.

Decision Breakdown

The Court first granted permission to file the review petition and condoned the delay in filing it. On the substance, the petitioners raised a new argument that 95 candidates who had not met the prescribed minimum-marks criteria (60% for reserved category, 70% for unreserved category, as set by the Court's own earlier interim orders) had been wrongly selected. After examining the grounds raised, the Court found no merit or reason to interfere with its earlier order, and dismissed the review petition.

Lesson Learnt

A review petition is not a second chance to re-argue a case on fresh grounds or perceived irregularities after losing on merits. The Supreme Court will only reconsider a final order where the review petition discloses a genuine, compelling error, and simply raising new selection-related grievances after the fact is not enough.

Sunil Kumar Yadav and Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware