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

Union of India & Ors. vs. Bhagwan Deen & Anr.

Civil AppealDecided 5 Apr 2022
Civil Appeal No. 2720 of 2022
Uday Umesh Lalit · S. Ravindra Bhat · Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Background

The respondents had obtained a favourable order from the Central Administrative Tribunal based on the Railways' LARSGESS Scheme (a scheme that allowed a dependent of a retiring railway employee to be absorbed in service in lieu of the employee getting a promotional upgrade). The Delhi High Court had dismissed the Union of India's challenge to that Tribunal order. Separately, the Punjab & Haryana High Court had criticised the same Scheme in another case, the Supreme Court had dismissed the challenge to that criticism, and the Railways had since terminated the Scheme entirely in 2019.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court noted that it had, in a series of other cases, consistently refused to recognise any enforceable right arising from the LARSGESS Scheme, which itself had been scrapped by the government. Viewed against that consistent line of rulings, the Tribunal and the Delhi High Court were wrong to grant relief based on the Scheme in this case. The Court allowed the Union of India's appeal, set aside the Tribunal's and High Court's orders, and dismissed the original application, while also directing that the cost of the Union's delay in filing be recovered from the officials responsible for the delay, not the public exchequer.

Lesson Learnt

Once a government scheme has been withdrawn and the Supreme Court has repeatedly declined to recognise any right flowing from it, lower tribunals and High Courts cannot keep granting relief under that scheme in later, similar cases: settled precedent must be followed consistently.

Union of India & Ors. vs. Bhagwan Deen & Anr. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware