ASHOK CHIMAJI NAVSUPE vs ALICON CASTALLOY LTD. — WP/2174/2025

Case under Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 Section ---. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 30th April 2026.

CNR: HCBM010120402023

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

WP/7109/2023

Filing Date

13-03-2023

Registration No

WP/2174/2025

Registration Date

13-02-2025

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR

Bench Type

Single

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL ( 30 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS ( 99 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

30th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Acts & Sections

Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 Section ---

Petitioner(s)

ASHOK CHIMAJI NAVSUPE

Adv. Gaurav Gawande

Respondent(s)

ALICON CASTALLOY LTD.

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR

06-03-2024

FOR ORDERS (DUE MATTERS)

08-01-2024

FOR ORDERS (DUE MATTERS)

28-11-2023

FOR ORDERS (DUE MATTERS)

17-10-2023

FOR ORDERS (DUE MATTERS)

26-04-2024

FOR ADMISSION

Orders

28-11-2024
30-04-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR

Case Summary: WP/2174/2025 Court Decision: The Bombay High Court partly allowed the writ petitions filed by employees Ashok Chimaji Navsupe and Shahaji Madhukar Jadhav against Alicon Castalloy Limited. The court quashed the Labour Court's termination award and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, finding the guilt finding lacked sufficient evidentiary foundation—particularly the allegation of submitting a forged B.A. certificate without proper proof or examination of the handwriting expert's report. Both parties are now permitted to present evidence before the Labour Court within six months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP/2174/2025 Court Decision: The Bombay High Court partly allowed the writ petitions filed by employees Ashok Chimaji Navsupe and Shahaji Madhukar Jadhav against Alicon Castalloy Limited. The court quashed the Labour Court's termination award and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, finding the guilt finding lacked sufficient evidentiary foundation—particularly the allegation of submitting a forged B.A. certificate without proper proof or examination of the handwriting expert's report. Both parties are now permitted to present evidence before the Labour Court within six months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case