In short. Through a special leave petition you request the Supreme Court's permission before it will hear any appeal from the High Court. Leave is not a right: the Court grants leave in a small share of service cases, mostly where a legal question affects many employees or the injustice is plain. The usual deadline is 90 days from the date the High Court pronounced judgment, not counting the time spent getting the certified copy, and an Advocate-on-Record must file it. A large share of service SLPs end at their first or second listing. Before day 60, have the judgment read for a question that genuinely needs the Supreme Court.
Is this your situation?
- The High Court has dismissed your writ against a CAT order, or set aside a tribunal order in your favour.
- You are a CAPF, PSU or bank employee and the High Court has decided your service writ against you.
- The judgment was delivered within the last three months, or you are just past that point.
- The High Court's reasoning seems to clash with a Supreme Court judgment or with another High Court.
- The department has told you it is taking the matter to the Supreme Court.
- Your case raises a point that affects a whole cadre, such as pension, pay fixation or seniority rules.
- You have been served a notice from the Supreme Court in an SLP filed by the Union of India.
Before anything else: should you file at all?
Most people who lose in the High Court want to go to the Supreme Court. Many of them should not. Article 136 gives the Supreme Court a discretion to grant leave to appeal from any judgment in the country, and the Court uses that discretion sparingly. In service matters, a petition that only says the High Court got the facts wrong, or should have believed the employee rather than the department, is usually dismissed at the first hearing in a one-line order.
The SLPs that get notice tend to share some features. There is a legal question that matters beyond the petitioner, such as how a pension rule applies to everyone who retired on a particular date. Or two High Courts have taken opposite views and the Supreme Court needs to settle it. Or the High Court overlooked a binding Supreme Court judgment that was cited before it. Or the result is so harsh, a dismissal for a trivial lapse after thirty years, that it shocks the conscience.
Advocate B.K. Singh's first job when someone brings a High Court judgment is often to say no. If the High Court applied settled law to the facts in a reasonable way, an SLP will cost money and months and is likely to end in a single sentence. Saying that early is more useful than saying it after the petition is dismissed.
Points that tend to get notice issued, and points that do not
- Likely to be heard: a conflict between High Courts. One High Court counts a period of service for pension and another does not, under the same rule. The Supreme Court is the only forum that can resolve that.
- Likely to be heard: a binding judgment ignored. The High Court decided a recovery case without considering Rafiq Masih, though it was cited. Pointing that out squarely is a strong ground.
- Likely to be heard: a question affecting a cadre. How MACP interacts with a cadre restructuring, or how a DoPT office memorandum applies to a whole recruitment year, often draws notice because the answer affects many people.
- Can be heard: grossly disproportionate penalty. Dismissal for a minor misconduct after long clean service. The Court does not reweigh the inquiry evidence, but it does sometimes look at the penalty.
- Rarely heard: a disagreement on facts. The High Court accepted the department's version of when you joined or whether you were absent. The Supreme Court does not usually reopen such findings.
- Rarely heard: a new argument. Points never raised before the tribunal or the High Court need leave and an explanation, and are usually refused.
- Rarely heard: a delayed claim with no explanation. Where both lower forums found the claim stale, the Supreme Court is slow to intervene.
The legal framework
Article 136, Constitution of India
Lets the Supreme Court, as a matter of discretion, allow an appeal against a decision of almost any court or tribunal in the country (courts and tribunals set up under laws relating to the armed forces are carved out). Leave is permission. Until it is granted, there is no appeal at all, only a petition asking for one.
Order XXI, Supreme Court Rules, 2013
The procedure for civil SLPs. Rule 1 sets the period: 90 days from the judgment, or 60 days from an order refusing a certificate of fitness, with Sections 4, 5, 12 and 14 of the Limitation Act applying. Rule 3 requires the petition in Form No. 28 with a list of dates, an affidavit, and a statement whether any earlier SLP was filed against the same order. Pleadings are confined to what was urged below unless the Court permits otherwise.
Order IV, Supreme Court Rules, 2013
Filing is reserved for Advocates-on-Record, a separate category of advocates who have passed the Court's own examination. Other advocates, including senior counsel, may argue the case, but the petition is filed and the record kept in an Advocate-on-Record's name.
Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala (Supreme Court, 2000)
When leave is refused in a one-line order with no reasons, the Supreme Court has not endorsed what the High Court said, and the High Court's decision does not become a Supreme Court decision. The High Court's judgment stands on its own. This matters when an SLP is dismissed and someone later says the Supreme Court decided the point.
Counting the 90 days
Day one is the day the High Court pronounced judgment. When you received it, or heard of it from your counsel, does not shift that. Section 12 of the Limitation Act then gives back the days the copying section took: the gap between your application for a certified copy and the day the copy was ready. Apply for the certified copy within days of the judgment. Applying late eats into your 90 days because the exclusion only starts when you apply.
If you first filed a review petition in the High Court, the SLP should usually challenge both the main judgment and the order dismissing the review. An SLP against the review order alone generally fails. The time spent on the review in the High Court is not automatically excluded, so file the SLP with an application explaining the dates if you are past 90 days from the main judgment.
Delay can be condoned for sufficient cause, and an application for condonation is filed with the SLP. The Court tends to accept a short, well-documented delay from a retiree or a low-paid employee more readily than an unexplained delay from a department. But condonation is a discretion, and the more days, the harder it gets. The guide on the 90 days, the certified copy and condonation covers the arithmetic with examples.
From the High Court judgment to the first hearing
Apply for the certified copy at once
Apply at the High Court's copying section the same week. Note the dates of application and delivery; both go into the SLP and decide your limitation.
Have the judgment read for an SLP question
Get an honest view on whether there is a point the Supreme Court will want to hear. Write the question in one sentence. If it cannot be put in one sentence, the SLP probably lacks focus.
Gather the complete record
Put together everything that was before the High Court, and below that, everything the tribunal saw if the case began there. The Supreme Court requires annexures to be true copies of documents that were before the courts below.
Engage an Advocate-on-Record
The firm files through an Advocate-on-Record, who signs the petition and is responsible for it in the Registry. You or your counsel brief the Advocate-on-Record with the record and the draft.
Draft the SLP in Form No. 28
Its parts are fixed: a synopsis with a chronology, the legal questions, the grounds and the reliefs, with any interim prayer included in the same form. The list of dates is what the judges read first, so it must be accurate and short.
File, usually through e-filing, and cure defects
The Registry checks the papers and lists defects, which the Advocate-on-Record must cure within the time allowed. Uncured defects can lead to the matter not being listed, or worse.
First hearing on a miscellaneous day
Fresh SLPs are listed before a bench, typically on a miscellaneous day. The bench may dismiss, issue notice, issue notice limited to a particular question, or tag the case with similar pending matters.
If notice issues, counter and leave
The other side answers on affidavit, you reply, and the bench then decides on leave. Once leave is granted the matter is renumbered as a civil appeal and joins the queue for regular hearing, which in the Supreme Court can be long.
Writing the question the Supreme Court will read first
Every SLP opens with questions of law. In a service case the temptation is to list fifteen of them, each a restatement of a grievance. The judges read these questions before anything else, often in the few minutes they have for each fresh matter, and a long list suggests that nothing in it is serious. Two or three questions, each one sentence, each pointing to a specific rule or judgment, work far better.
A good question names the rule and the conflict. For example: whether a Group C employee who retired in 2018 can be made to repay an excess paid between 2009 and 2016, in view of State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih, when the High Court did not consider that judgment though it was cited. A weak question reads: whether the High Court erred in dismissing the writ petition. The first tells the bench in one breath why the case may deserve its time. The second tells it nothing.
The list of dates matters almost as much. It should run from appointment to the High Court judgment in short entries, with each document's page number in the paper book. If a date of service or a date of an order is disputed, say so in the entry. The bench will not have the trial record in front of it, so the list of dates is, in practice, the record.
Time and cost in general terms
| Stage | Typical time | Costs |
|---|---|---|
| Certified copy of High Court judgment | A few days to a few weeks | Copying charges at the High Court |
| Assessment and decision to file | 1 to 2 weeks | Professional fee for the opinion, agreed in writing at the first meeting |
| Drafting and filing | 2 to 4 weeks, within the 90 days | Supreme Court court fee is modest; paper book and filing charges; Advocate-on-Record's fee, agreed in advance |
| Curing defects and first listing | A few weeks to a few months | Minor |
| Notice stage, counter and rejoinder | Several months to a year or more | Fees per stage, agreed in writing |
| Civil appeal after leave | Often several years | Separate costs for the final hearing |
| Legal aid | Applied before or at filing | The Supreme Court Legal Services Committee helps those within its eligibility limits |
Papers we need to assess and file an SLP
- Certified copy of the High Court judgment, with dates of applying for it and receiving it
- Any order on a review petition in the High Court, also certified
- The writ petition with annexures, the counter affidavit and the rejoinder filed in the High Court
- The CAT order and the OA record, if the case came through the tribunal
- Every interim order passed by the High Court
- Your service record extracts relevant to the dispute: appointment, promotion, penalty or PPO
- Any judgment of another High Court or the Supreme Court that you believe supports you
- Identity proof and contact details for the affidavit and vakalatnama
Where and how the petition is filed
Whether the judgment came from Gauhati or Gujarat, every SLP is filed in the same building on Tilak Marg in New Delhi. Most filing now happens through the Supreme Court's e-filing system, which lets the Advocate-on-Record upload the petition and documents and pay fees online. A litigant in Shillong or Thiruvananthapuram does not need to travel to file.
The firm works with Advocates-on-Record for Supreme Court filings, and Advocate B.K. Singh appears before the Supreme Court. The work on the petition, which is mostly a question of reducing a long service dispute to a few clear pages, can be done from our offices in Dwarka and Vaishali, or by online consultation from anywhere in India.
Hearings at the admission stage are short, sometimes a minute or two. You do not need to be present, though many petitioners like to watch. Where hybrid hearings are permitted, the Advocate-on-Record will tell you whether the bench allows remote viewing for your matter.
A made-up example: a clerk removed from service in Kolkata
Here's a made-up example. Partha Ghosh was an Upper Division Clerk at a Kolkata office of a central ministry. After twenty-six years of service without any earlier penalty, he was removed from service for being absent for nineteen days without sanctioned leave, during which he says he was nursing his wife after surgery. The Kolkata Bench of CAT dismissed his OA, and the Calcutta High Court dismissed his writ, holding that the inquiry was fair and the penalty was for the department to decide.
His counsel looked at the High Court judgment with one question: is there anything here the Supreme Court would want to hear? The inquiry did seem fair, and the absence was admitted. Arguing that he was not absent would go nowhere. The penalty was another matter. Removal after twenty-six clean years, for nineteen days of absence with a medical reason backed by hospital papers, was arguably out of all proportion, and the High Court had not discussed proportionality at all, though it was raised.
The SLP was filed on the 71st day, with the certified copy dates showing it was well within time. It raised a single question: whether the penalty of removal was so disproportionate as to call for interference. At the first hearing the bench issued notice limited to the question of penalty. The department filed a counter. The case is now on the list for a decision on whether the penalty should be substituted, a much narrower fight than the one Partha started with, and one he has a real chance of being heard on.
When the Union of India files the SLP against you
The department, or the Union of India acting through the ministry, often takes service judgments to the Supreme Court when the result has financial consequences for a large number of employees. Notional increment, old pension scheme eligibility and arrears limits are recent examples. If you won in the High Court, consider lodging a caveat in the Supreme Court, so that you get notice before any interim order, such as a stay on payment, is passed.
If you receive notice of such an SLP, you must decide whether to appear. Appearing costs money, but if you do not, the Court may hear the Union alone. Where your case has been tagged with many others on the same issue, it is sometimes enough to appear through counsel who represents a group of employees, which spreads the cost. Ask the Advocate-on-Record whether your case is tagged and whether a common counter affidavit is being filed.
Remember that unless the Supreme Court stays the High Court's judgment, the department must comply with it. A pending SLP without a stay is not a reason for non-payment, and contempt can be pursued in the High Court or tribunal whose order is unimplemented. The page on what to do when a department does not comply with a tribunal order explains how that works at the CAT stage.
Matters that affect a whole cadre
Some service questions reach the Supreme Court because they affect thousands of people: the 30 June increment for pension, counting of earlier service for the old pension scheme, MACP benchmarks, and the three-year limit on arrears. In such cases, the Court often tags many SLPs together and decides them in one judgment. If your case is one of many on the same point, your SLP may wait for the lead matter.
An employee who did not file anything can still benefit from such a judgment if the government extends it to all similarly placed persons, as DoPT has done after some decisions. But that is not automatic. The government frequently limits the benefit to those who were parties, and the Supreme Court has upheld such limits in some contexts. If the point is important to you and others in your cadre have SLPs pending, consider whether an intervention application, or a fresh petition of your own, is worthwhile.
Associations and unions can file or support such petitions. Where a group of employees shares a grievance, pooling resources through a common petition often makes more sense than each filing alone.
Why many service SLPs are dismissed at the first hearing
- The question is factual. The petition asks the Court to reassess evidence that two forums have already weighed.
- The question is settled. The Supreme Court has already decided the point, and the High Court followed it.
- The list of dates is confusing. Judges reading forty fresh matters in a morning will not untangle a muddled chronology.
- Delay is unexplained. A petition filed months late without a clear reason for each period of delay starts on the back foot.
- The petition raises new grounds. Points not argued below are treated with suspicion and often not allowed.
- Too many grounds. Twenty grounds suggest the petitioner could not find one good one.
- Disclosure is incomplete. Failing to disclose an earlier SLP against the same order can lead to dismissal, or revocation of leave already granted.
Is it worth it for a retiree, a Group C employee or a candidate?
For a retiree, the question is whether the gain justifies the cost and the years. If a pension revision of a few thousand rupees a month is at stake and the point is unsettled, it may be. If the point is settled against you, it will not be. A retiree in his seventies should also weigh how long a civil appeal may take after leave is granted.
For a Group C employee facing dismissal or removal, the stakes are high and an SLP on proportionality may be worth filing even when the odds are modest. The Supreme Court Legal Services Committee provides help to those within its eligibility limits, and it is worth checking whether you qualify before deciding the cost is beyond you.
For a job candidate, the problem is time. By the time an SLP is heard, the recruitment may be over and the posts filled. Unless interim protection, such as a direction to keep a post vacant, can be obtained at the first hearing, the result may be of little practical use. CAPF personnel, PSU and bank employees, whose cases go to the High Court first, face the same SLP route; for them it is the second forum, not the third, which sometimes makes it more worthwhile. The page on CAPF, PSU and bank service writs explains that first stage.
Other routes after the High Court
A review petition in the High Court is the alternative where the High Court made an obvious error on the face of its own judgment, such as overlooking a document. It is decided by the same bench and, if dismissed, the SLP challenges both orders. The same logic as a review before the tribunal applies: review is for visible errors, not for rearguing.
If the Supreme Court dismisses your SLP, you can file a review petition in the Supreme Court, generally within 30 days, but it is decided in chambers and rarely succeeds. A curative petition, recognised in Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra (2002), exists only for the gravest of failures, such as a breach of natural justice in the Supreme Court itself, and needs a certificate from a senior advocate. Neither is a realistic plan in an ordinary service case.
A writ under Article 32 directly in the Supreme Court is not a substitute for an SLP against a High Court judgment. The Court will not entertain it as a way round the special leave route.
What to do before day 60
Apply for the certified copy of the High Court judgment now, and note the date. Collect the writ record and the tribunal record if there was one. Read the judgment and write down, in one sentence, what you think the High Court got wrong. If that sentence is about facts, think hard before spending on an SLP. If it is about a legal rule, a binding judgment or a penalty, have it assessed. For the earlier stage of these cases, see the page on a writ against a tribunal order and the Delhi High Court service writ page for cases from the Principal Bench.
If your opponent is the one going to the Supreme Court, think about a caveat and keep pressing for compliance unless there is a stay. Questions people often have at this point are collected on the page about the High Court and Supreme Court route.
To have your High Court judgment read for an SLP question within the 90 days, or for updates on how the Supreme Court is treating service petitions, contact Advocate B.K. Singh with the judgment and the date you applied for the certified copy.
Frequently asked questions
What is the time limit for filing an SLP in a service case?
Ninety days from the High Court's judgment under Order XXI of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. The time taken to get the certified copy is excluded. Delay can be condoned for sufficient cause, but that is discretionary.
Can I file an SLP directly against a CAT order?
No. After L. Chandra Kumar (1997), a tribunal order must first be challenged by writ in the High Court. The SLP lies against the High Court's judgment.
Can I file an SLP myself, without a lawyer?
A party can appear in person in the Supreme Court, but filing through an Advocate-on-Record is the normal route, and the Registry's requirements are strict. Most service SLPs are filed through an Advocate-on-Record.
My SLP was dismissed in one line. Does that mean the Supreme Court agreed with the High Court?
Not necessarily. Under Kunhayammed (2000), a non-speaking dismissal at the leave stage does not mean the Supreme Court approved the reasoning. The High Court judgment simply stands.
Can the department stop paying me because it has filed an SLP?
Only if the Supreme Court stays the High Court's judgment. Without a stay, the department must comply. Ask for a copy of any stay it relies on.
Is there free legal help for an SLP in the Supreme Court?
The Supreme Court Legal Services Committee helps litigants within its income limits. Check eligibility before filing.
How long does an SLP take in a service matter?
Many are decided at the first or second hearing. If notice and leave are granted, the resulting civil appeal can take several years to be heard finally.
Can I raise new arguments in my SLP?
Generally only points urged before the courts below. A new point needs the Court's leave and notice to the other side, and is often refused in service cases.