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 Mukesh Kumar Meena

Civil AppealDecided 28 Apr 2022
Civil Appeal No. 3468 of 2022
M.R. Shah · B.V. Nagarathna

Background

The respondent, a Scheduled Tribe (ST) category employee of the Income Tax Department, appeared for a departmental examination under rules requiring 45% marks for general category candidates but only 40% for SC/ST candidates. He cleared every subject above 45% except "Other Taxes," where he scored 43%: already above the 40% ST threshold, so he was declared passed in his own category. He later sought two additional "grace marks" in that subject so his score would cross the 45% general-category threshold, which would let him be treated as a general category candidate for promotion purposes. The Central Administrative Tribunal rejected this, but the Rajasthan High Court reversed the Tribunal and directed the grace marks be given.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that the CBDT's grace marks policy existed solely to help marginally failing candidates cross the passing threshold in their own category, not to let an already-passed candidate accumulate extra marks to reclassify into a different (general) category for promotional advantage. Since the respondent had already passed in his ST category, there was no scope for granting him further grace marks. The Court found the High Court had wrongly relied on Rajesh Kumar Daria v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, which was not applicable to these facts, and restored the Tribunal's order dismissing the respondent's application.

Lesson Learnt

Grace marks or other examination concessions are ordinarily to be interpreted strictly for the specific purpose they were designed for (here, helping marginally failing candidates pass) and cannot be stretched by candidates who have already passed to gain an unrelated benefit like category reclassification for promotion.

Union of India & Ors. vs Mukesh Kumar Meena – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware