GUJARAT MAJDOOR SABHA, vs KALPTARU POWER TRANSMISSION LTD. — 55/2025

Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10. Status: For Production of Document. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.

For Production of Document Next hearing 12-Jun-2026 this date has passed

REF IT - REFERENCE I.T.

CNR: GJAH170001552024

Filing Number

46/2024

Filing Date

29-May-2024

Registration No

55/2025

Registration Date

29-May-2024

Court

INDUSTRIAL COURT, AHMEDABAD

Judge

5-Member, Industrial Court

Last updated 31-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GUJARAT MAJDOOR SABHA,

    Adv. L

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KALPTARU POWER TRANSMISSION LTD.

  2. 2.PADMAVATI MEN POWER SUPPLIERS,

  3. 3.PARSHWANATH SHWETA LABOUR SUPPLLIERS,

  4. 4.NISHITA LABOUR CONTRACTOR

  5. 5.ANITA ENTERPRISE

  6. 6.ESSEL ENGINEERING WORKS

  7. 7.JAY GOGA CONTRACTOR

  8. 8.AKASH LABOUR CONTRACTOR

Case History

  1. 12-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 08-May-2026

    For Production of Document

    Member, Industrial Court

  3. 03-Apr-2026

    For Production of Document

    Member, Industrial Court

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    For Production of Document

    Member, Industrial Court

  5. 05-Mar-2026

    For Production of Document

    Member, Industrial Court

  6. 12-Feb-2026

    For Production of Document

    Member, Industrial Court

  7. 03-Feb-2026

    For Production of Document

    Member, Industrial Court

  8. 02-Jan-2026

    For Production of Document

    Member, Industrial Court

  9. 05-Dec-2025

    For Production of Document

    Member, Industrial Court

  10. 03-Nov-2025

    Order

    Case Summary: Reference (I.T.) 55/2025 Outcome: Application disposed; case adjourned for further proceedings. The Industrial Tribunal rejected the employer's request to decide preliminarily whether contractor arrangements are "sham and bogus" before addressing other demands. The Tribunal held that while the High Court directed adjudication of this issue first, it constitutes a mixed question of law and fact requiring evidence from both parties. Defendants (contractors) are directed to file written statements by the next hearing, after which both sides must submit evidence on demands 1 and 2 regarding the nature of the contract arrangements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  11. 03-Nov-2025

    For w.s. of First party

    Member, Industrial Court

  12. 14-Oct-2025

    For w.s. of First party

    Member, Industrial Court

  13. 06-Oct-2025

    Order

  14. 06-Oct-2025

    For w.s. of First party

    Member, Industrial Court

  15. 04-Oct-2025

    For w.s. of First party

    Member, Industrial Court

  16. 01-Sep-2025

    For w.s. of First party

    Member, Industrial Court

  17. 07-Aug-2025

    For w.s. of First party

    Member, Industrial Court

  18. 04-Jul-2025

    For w.s. of First party

    Member, Industrial Court

  19. 09-May-2025

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Member, Industrial Court

  20. 01-Apr-2025

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Member, Industrial Court

  21. 03-Feb-2025

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Member, Industrial Court

  22. 06-Jan-2025

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Member, Industrial Court

  23. 04-Dec-2024

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Member, Industrial Court

  24. 07-Nov-2024

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Member, Industrial Court

  25. 09-Oct-2024

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Member, Industrial Court

  26. 02-Sep-2024

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Member, Industrial Court

  27. 05-Aug-2024

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Member, Industrial Court

  28. 09-Jul-2024

    For Notice Serve to both partys

    Member, Industrial Court

  29. 05-Jul-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  30. 29-May-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 55/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Reference (I.T.) 55/2025 Outcome: Application disposed; case adjourned for further proceedings. The Industrial Tribunal rejected the employer's request to decide preliminarily whether contractor arrangements are "sham and bogus" before addressing other demands. The Tribunal held that while the High Court directed adjudication of this issue first, it constitutes a mixed question of law and fact requiring evidence from both parties. Defendants (contractors) are directed to file written statements by the next hearing, after which both sides must submit evidence on demands 1 and 2 regarding the nature of the contract arrangements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case