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

Wg. Cdr. A.U. Tayyaba (Retd.) and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors.

Not available · 2024 INSC 311Decided 15 Apr 2024
Not available
Chief Justice Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud · Justice J.B. Pardiwala · Justice Manoj Misra

Background

In an earlier 2022 judgment, the Supreme Court had directed that women Short Service Commissioned Officers (SSCOs) released from the armed forces after 14 years be treated as having completed the 20-year minimum qualifying service for pension, with arrears of pension payable from the deemed completion date. When the government issued Pension Payment Orders, it computed pension using the officers' last-drawn salary as of their actual release date, without factoring in the notional salary increments they would have earned up to the deemed 20-year mark, prompting this application for clarification.

Decision Breakdown

The Court clarified that its 2022 direction meant pension must be computed on the salary as of the date of deemed completion of 20 years, which necessarily includes notional increments between the actual release date and that deemed date. It further directed that the commuted value of pension, encashment of accumulated annual leave (up to the permissible maximum of 300 days), and ECHS (medical) benefits all be recalculated and paid on this corrected basis, with all arrears to be settled by 15 June 2024, and it directed correction of Pension Payment Orders that had wrongly recorded the officers as "released" rather than retired with full benefits.

Lesson Learnt

When a court's earlier judgment grants pensionary parity based on a "deemed" length of service, the benefit must be computed as if the officer had genuinely served through to that deemed date, including salary increments, not frozen at the salary drawn on the date of actual release.

Wg. Cdr. A.U. Tayyaba (Retd.) and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware