FIAT INDIA AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED THR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE vs SANDEEP BHASKAR PATEKAR — HCBM10435022025
Case under Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 Section ---. Next hearing: 24th April 2026.
CNR: HCBM010435022025
Next Hearing
24th April 2026
Filing Number
WP/27576/2025
Filing Date
07-08-2025
Judge
SHRI H.M.BHOSALE, Registrar(Judl I)
Coram
SHRI H.M.BHOSALE, Registrar(Judl I)
Bench Type
Single
Category
LABOUR MATTERS SINGLE BENCH ( 65 )
Sub-Category
WAGES ( 11 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
FIAT INDIA AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED THR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
Adv. CHETAN ARVIND ALAI,seema Chopda,seema Chopda, ,seema Chopda
Respondent(s)
SANDEEP BHASKAR PATEKAR
Hearing History
Judge: SHRI H.M.BHOSALE, Registrar(Judl I)
OBJECTIONS TO BE REMOVED
FOR ORDERS (OBJECTION NOT REMOVED)
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 19-08-2025 | OBJECTIONS TO BE REMOVED |
| 26-09-2025 | FOR ORDERS (OBJECTION NOT REMOVED) |
Orders
Case Summary Writ Petition (ST.) No. 27576 of 2025 | High Court of Judicature at Bombay | Pronounced: April 30, 2026 Outcome: Writ petition partly allowed. The Labour Court's Award dated March 27, 2025 (which had reinstated respondent Sandeep Bhaskar Patekar with 50% back wages) is quashed and set aside. The case is remanded to Labour Court for fresh adjudication with directions to permit both parties to lead full evidence on whether the respondent's prolonged absence (November 2013 to February 2015) was willful misconduct or justified by his judicial custody, before deciding the matter afresh on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Writ Petition (ST.) No. 27576 of 2025 | High Court of Judicature at Bombay | Pronounced: April 30, 2026 Outcome: Writ petition partly allowed. The Labour Court's Award dated March 27, 2025 (which had reinstated respondent Sandeep Bhaskar Patekar with 50% back wages) is quashed and set aside. The case is remanded to Labour Court for fresh adjudication with directions to permit both parties to lead full evidence on whether the respondent's prolonged absence (November 2013 to February 2015) was willful misconduct or justified by his judicial custody, before deciding the matter afresh on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts