LegalAware
LegalAware.ai
EMPOWERING LEGAL AWARENESS
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

Sunita Burman vs The Commissioner, M.P. Housing and Infrastructure Development Board & Ors.

Civil Appeal · Not availableDecided 14 Oct 2022

Civil Appeal No. 7068 of 2022

Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud · Hima Kohli

Background

The appellant's husband was engaged by the M.P. Housing and Infrastructure Development Board in 1977 as a daily-wage Muster Roll employee, and in 1997 was placed in the Board's "work charged" establishment — a category distinct from regular, pensionable service. He remained a work-charged employee until his death in 2016. His widow applied for family pension, which the Board rejected on the ground that no pension scheme applied to work-charged employees. A Single Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled in her favour, but a Division Bench reversed that decision on appeal, prompting her to approach the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that the deceased husband had never been "regularized" into regular service — an office order the appellant relied on to claim regularization was misread, since it merely placed certain Muster Roll employees into the work-charged establishment, not into regular pensionable posts. The Court noted that the Housing Board's own Board of Directors had, in 2015, extended pension benefits to work-charged employees by bringing them under the National Pension System (NPS) on an optional basis, but the appellant's husband had never opted into that scheme before his death. Since he remained a work-charged (non-regular) employee throughout and did not exercise the NPS option available to him, the Court held his widow was not entitled to family pension under the ordinary pension rules, and dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court's Division Bench judgment.

Lesson Learnt

Employees in "work-charged" or similarly non-regular government service categories are generally not automatically entitled to pension benefits meant for regular employees; where an optional pension scheme (like the NPS) is made available to such employees, failing to opt into it during one's lifetime can bar dependents from claiming family pension after death.

Official Source (sci.gov.in)Download Full PDF
Sunita Burman vs The Commissioner, M.P. Housing and Infrastructure Development Board & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware