CADILA PHARMASCUTICALS LTD. vs DIPAK B KPATEL Advocate - P J MAHARAJA — 218/2024
Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 33/2/B. Status: For Hearing of Priliminary Point/Contention. Next hearing: 17th July 2026.
APP IT - APPLICATION I.T.
CNR: GJAH170004562024
Next Hearing
17th July 2026
Filing Number
218/2024
Filing Date
17-09-2024
Registration No
218/2024
Registration Date
17-09-2024
Court
INDUSTRIAL COURT, AHMEDABAD
Judge
2-MEMBER, INDUSTRIAL COURT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
CADILA PHARMASCUTICALS LTD.
Adv. P I SHAH
Respondent(s)
DIPAK B KPATEL Advocate - P J MAHARAJA
Hearing History
Judge: 2-MEMBER, INDUSTRIAL COURT
For Hearing of Priliminary Point/Contention
For Hearing of Priliminary Point/Contention
For Hearing of Priliminary Point/Contention
For Evidence of Applicant
For Hearing of Priliminary Point/Contention
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 28-05-2026 | For Hearing of Priliminary Point/Contention |
| 18-04-2026 | For Hearing of Priliminary Point/Contention |
| 13-03-2026 | For Hearing of Priliminary Point/Contention |
| 12-02-2026 | For Evidence of Applicant |
| 31-01-2026 | For Hearing of Priliminary Point/Contention |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 218/2024 Petitioner: CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. Respondent: DIPAK B PATEL (Employee/Union Representative) Outcome: The petitioner's approval application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has been DISMISSED/REJECTED. The tribunal found that the dismissal order lacked proper domestic inquiry procedures and no charge sheet was issued to the employee beforehand, making the approval petition legally invalid and contrary to established labor law principles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 218/2024 Petitioner: CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. Respondent: DIPAK B PATEL (Employee/Union Representative) Outcome: The petitioner's approval application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has been DISMISSED/REJECTED. The tribunal found that the dismissal order lacked proper domestic inquiry procedures and no charge sheet was issued to the employee beforehand, making the approval petition legally invalid and contrary to established labor law principles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts