PRAKASH CHANDRA DAS LAKSHMAN CHANDRA HALDER vs BANDHAN FINANCIAL SERVICE PRIVATE LIMTIED AND ORS. — WPA/8131/2026

Case under Industrial Disputes Act ,1947 Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 18th May 2026.

CNR: WBCHCA0155322026

CASE DISPOSED

Next Hearing

10th April 2026

Filing Number

WPA/7952/2026

Filing Date

31-03-2026

Registration No

WPA/8131/2026

Registration Date

01-04-2026

Judge

HON'BLE JUSTICE SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)

Coram

HON'BLE JUSTICE SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )

Sub-Category

AWARDS/ORDERS OF INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL ( 14 )

Judicial Branch

MANDAMUS SECTION

Decision Date

18th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Acts & Sections

Industrial Disputes Act ,1947 Section NA

Petitioner(s)

PRAKASH CHANDRA DAS LAKSHMAN CHANDRA HALDER

Respondent(s)

BANDHAN FINANCIAL SERVICE PRIVATE LIMTIED AND ORS.

BANDHAN BNK LTD

SEVENTH INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL GOVT. OF WB

STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)

10-04-2026

NEW MOTION

18-05-2026

GROUP III (MOTION)

07-05-2026

NEW MOTION (GROUP - III)

Orders

18-05-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)

Case Summary: WPA 8131/2026 The High Court upheld the 7th Industrial Tribunal's dismissal of petitioner Prakash Chandra Das's application under Section 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, finding the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction. The court determined that since Bandhan Bank operates as a multi-state banking company, the Central Government—not the state Tribunal—is the appropriate authority to adjudicate such disputes. The petitioner was granted liberty to approach the appropriate central authority for a fresh reference. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WPA 8131/2026 The High Court upheld the 7th Industrial Tribunal's dismissal of petitioner Prakash Chandra Das's application under Section 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, finding the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction. The court determined that since Bandhan Bank operates as a multi-state banking company, the Central Government—not the state Tribunal—is the appropriate authority to adjudicate such disputes. The petitioner was granted liberty to approach the appropriate central authority for a fresh reference. 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