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.

Environmental LawSupreme Court of India

The State of Rajasthan and Anr. vs Ultratech Cement Ltd.

Civil AppealDecided 26 Aug 2022
Civil Appeal No. 5841 of 2022
N.V. Ramana · Hima Kohli · C.T. Ravikumar

Background

Ultratech Cement wanted to set up a large cement plant in Rajasthan and needed government land, including some plots officially recorded in revenue records as "Johad" (a pond/water body), to be allotted to it for a mining lease. Two separate site inspections by the local Tehsildar, and repeated recommendations by the District Collector, found that no actual water body existed on the disputed land and recommended reclassifying it. The State Government nonetheless refused to allot the land, citing the "Johad" classification and an earlier High Court ruling restricting alienation of water-body land, leading the company to approach the High Court, which ultimately ruled in the company's favour and directed processing of the allotment.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court examined the two Tehsildar inspection reports, the District Collector's repeated recommendations, and a Gram Panchayat resolution, all consistently confirming no pond actually existed on the land, and held that the State Government had never disputed or challenged these findings through proper channels or evidence. It rejected the State's reliance on general environmental-law precedents (like Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum and the Precautionary Principle), holding that those principles apply where the environmental impact is uncertain, not here where site inspections definitively showed no water body existed. The Court also held that an earlier High Court ruling (Abdul Rahman) restricting alienation of pond land had been misread by the State, since it did not bar correction of the revenue record where no pond in fact existed. The appeal by the State was dismissed and the High Court's direction to process the land allotment, subject to the company's undertakings for environmental compensatory measures, was upheld.

Lesson Learnt

A land parcel's official revenue classification (such as "pond" or "Johad") is not conclusive if repeated, unchallenged, on-ground inspection reports establish that no such feature actually exists: authorities cannot rely on outdated or incorrect land records to block a lawful claim when their own officers' findings say otherwise.

The State of Rajasthan and Anr. vs Ultratech Cement Ltd. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware