DIVISONALCONTROLLER GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION JAMNAGAR vs ANISHABEN A.SHAHMDAR — 56/2025
Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 33/2/B. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 29th April 2026.
APP IT - APPLICATION I.T.
CNR: GJAH170001332025
Filing Number
56/2025
Filing Date
27-03-2025
Registration No
56/2025
Registration Date
27-03-2025
Court
INDUSTRIAL COURT, AHMEDABAD
Judge
2-MEMBER, INDUSTRIAL COURT
Decision Date
29th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGEMENT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
DIVISONALCONTROLLER GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION JAMNAGAR
Adv. P F JHAVERI
Respondent(s)
ANISHABEN A.SHAHMDAR
Hearing History
Judge: 2-MEMBER, INDUSTRIAL COURT
Disposed
For Order
For Argument of opponent
For Argument of Applicant
For Evidence of opponent
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 22-04-2026 | For Order |
| 15-04-2026 | For Argument of opponent |
| 01-04-2026 | For Argument of Applicant |
| 11-03-2026 | For Evidence of opponent |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Industrial Court of Ahmedabad ruled that the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation's dismissal of conductor Anishabhen A. Shahmdar was legally valid under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The court found that the employer had properly followed natural justice principles and regulatory procedures in issuing a charge sheet, conducting an inquiry, and providing the employee with an adequate opportunity to defend herself before terminating her employment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Industrial Court of Ahmedabad ruled that the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation's dismissal of conductor Anishabhen A. Shahmdar was legally valid under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The court found that the employer had properly followed natural justice principles and regulatory procedures in issuing a charge sheet, conducting an inquiry, and providing the employee with an adequate opportunity to defend herself before terminating her employment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts