Case-law classification is proposition-based. A 2026 labour judgment is not automatically a “Labour Code case.” The table distinguishes direct construction of the new Codes, implementation proceedings, predecessor-law transitional precedent and adjacent service/employment precedent.
Case intelligence register
| Case | Legal weight | Proposition | Finin2min holding/status note | Sources / links |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hamsaanandini Nanduri v. Union of India Supreme Court · 2026 INSC 246 · 17-03-2026 | DIRECT_CODE_INTERPRETATION | Code on Social Security s60(4) | Court held the three-month age limit for an adopted child in s60(4) unconstitutional under Articles 14 and 21 and directed a reading of s60(4) without that age cut-off; 12-week benefit language remains. | Court source Related hub/provision |
| Indian Federation of App-Based Transport Workers (IFAT) v. Union of India Supreme Court · W.P.(C) 1068/2021 · 09-04-2026 order / continuing proceeding | DIRECT_CODE_IMPLEMENTATION_PROCEEDING | Social Security Code Chapter IX — gig/platform/unorganised workers | Proceeding concerns implementation of Chapter IX. The 09-04-2026 record of proceedings confirms the matter remained before the Court; do not describe it as a final merits ruling creating a scheme. | Court source Related hub/provision |
| M/s Premium Transmission Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra Supreme Court · 2026 INSC 87 · 27-01-2026 | PREDECESSOR_TRANSITIONAL | Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 / transition to IR Code | A 2026 Supreme Court industrial-dispute decision under the predecessor ID Act. Use for transition/context only; do not label it an interpretation of an IR Code section unless the proposition expressly engages the Code. | Court source Related hub/provision |
| Jai Prakash Saini v. Managing Director, U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd. Supreme Court · 2026 INSC 305 · 01-04-2026 | ADJACENT_SERVICE_PRECEDENT | Disciplinary enquiry / natural justice | Service-law precedent on disciplinary enquiry and natural justice. Relevant to employment governance but not a direct interpretation of the four Labour Codes. | Court source Related hub/provision |
Direct Code authority
Hamsaanandini Nanduri — Social Security Code s60(4)
A direct Supreme Court construction of a live 2020 Code provision. This is the model for case-to-section linking: exact provision, exact proposition, exact court document.
Pending litigation warning
IFAT is not a final merits ratio. It is tracked because it directly concerns implementation of Chapter IX for gig/platform/unorganised workers, but the current public record must not be converted into a proposition that the Supreme Court has itself designed or notified a scheme.