AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD AND ORS. SECRETARY vs MADHUSUDAN — C.A. No. 5175/2011

Case under Section XV. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010022662010

Filing Date

21-Jan-2010

Registration No

C.A. No. 5175/2011

Diary Number

2266/2010

Order Date

20-Apr-2023

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Allowed

Last updated 01-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Section XV

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD AND ORS. SECRETARY

    Adv. PRATIBHA JAIN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MADHUSUDAN

    Adv. MUKUL KUMAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 20-Apr-2023

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 20-Apr-2023

    Fixed Date by Court

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Ramasubramanian and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Mithal

  4. 19-Apr-2023

    Fixed Date by Court

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Ramasubramanian and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Mithal

  5. 22-Mar-2023

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  6. 22-Mar-2023

    Ordinary

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Ramasubramanian and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Mithal

  7. 15-Feb-2023

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 15-Feb-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 12-Apr-2016
  10. 12-Apr-2016

    Office ReportView PDF

  11. 12-Apr-2016
  12. 03-Jul-2012
  13. 16-Mar-2012
  14. 05-Jul-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 25-Apr-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  16. 14-Feb-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  17. 06-Oct-2010
  18. 01-Sep-2010
  19. 16-Jul-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  20. 15-Mar-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  21. 21-Jan-2010

    Case filed

    Registration No. C.A. No. 5175/2011

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of C.A. No. 005175/2011 The Supreme Court allowed the appeals filed by Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., setting aside the High Court's order that had directed payment of higher pay scales to respondent employees from 1974 onwards. The Court held that the Single Judge improperly interfered with a Screening Committee's expert findings without applying judicial review parameters under Article 226, noting the Labour Court itself had referred the matter to this expert committee. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case