GOVT OF TAMIL NADU DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION REP. BY SECRETARY vs UNITED LABOUR FEDERATION AND ANR. REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY SRI K. NITHYANANDAM — C.A. No. 19497/2017

Case under Section XII-B. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010091422011

Filing Date

17-Mar-2011

Registration No

C.A. No. 19497/2017

Diary Number

9142/2011

Order Date

21-Nov-2017

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Leave Granted & Disposed off

Last updated 04-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Section XII-B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GOVT OF TAMIL NADU DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION REP. BY SECRETARY

    Adv. VINODH KANNA B.[P-1] [Gr]

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.UNITED LABOUR FEDERATION AND ANR. REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY SRI K. NITHYANANDAM

    Adv. SHIVAJI M. JADHAV[R-1] B. BALAJI (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-1]

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 21-Nov-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 21-Nov-2017

    Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.K. Agrawal and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre

  4. 03-Nov-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  5. 03-Nov-2017

    Ordinary

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.K. Agrawal and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre

  6. 29-Aug-2017

    Fixed Date by Court

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.K. Agrawal and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre

  7. 21-Aug-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 21-Aug-2017

    After Week/Month/Vacation

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.K. Agrawal and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre

  9. 04-Aug-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 04-Aug-2017

    After Week/Month/Vacation

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.K. Agrawal and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre

  11. 07-Jul-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  12. 07-Jul-2017

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  13. 05-May-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 05-May-2017

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 05-May-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  16. 09-Sep-2015
  17. 09-Sep-2015

    Office ReportView PDF

  18. 09-Sep-2015
  19. 26-Mar-2015
  20. 26-Mar-2015
  21. 09-Dec-2014
  22. 09-Dec-2014
  23. 22-Sep-2014
  24. 22-Sep-2014
  25. 18-Jul-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  26. 26-Mar-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  27. 26-Feb-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  28. 10-Jan-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  29. 03-Dec-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  30. 01-Oct-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  31. 10-Sep-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  32. 24-Jul-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  33. 26-Apr-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  34. 06-Mar-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  35. 17-Jan-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  36. 26-Nov-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  37. 28-Sep-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  38. 21-Aug-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  39. 09-Jul-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  40. 19-Apr-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  41. 15-Mar-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  42. 30-Jan-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  43. 13-Dec-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  44. 09-Nov-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  45. 26-Sep-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  46. 29-Jun-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  47. 15-Apr-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  48. 17-Mar-2011

    Case filed

    Registration No. C.A. No. 19497/2017

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: C.A. No. 019497/2017 - Government of Tamil Nadu v. United Labour Federation The Supreme Court dismissed three consolidated civil appeals by the Government of Tamil Nadu challenging a 2007 Madras High Court order directing the Corporation of Chennai to absorb identified workers in order of seniority. The Court clarified that since Tamil Nadu Government was not a party to the original proceedings, it could not be bound by the High Court's direction, which was issued solely against the Corporation of Chennai. The Court noted Tamil Nadu's delay in challenging the order only after a 2010 enforcement direction, and found no grounds to interfere with the impugned order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case