MAZDUR KALYAN SANGH vs CHIEF EXICUTIVE OFFICER, G.M.T.B. Advocate - S C DESAI — 85/2012
Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 010. Status: For Argument of Second party. Next hearing: 11th June 2026.
REF IT - REFERENCE (I.T.)
CNR: GJBN140000692012
Next Hearing
11th June 2026
Filing Number
85/2012
Filing Date
06-08-2012
Registration No
85/2012
Registration Date
06-08-2012
Court
INDUSTRIAL COURT, BHAVNAGAR
Judge
1-MEMBER, INDUSTRIAL COURT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MAZDUR KALYAN SANGH
Adv. A R CHAUHAN
Respondent(s)
CHIEF EXICUTIVE OFFICER, G.M.T.B. Advocate - S C DESAI
PORT OFFICER, G.M.T.B.
Adv. S C DESAI
SAGAR STIVIDOS PVT LTD
Adv. P P PATEL
Hearing History
Judge: 1-MEMBER, INDUSTRIAL COURT
For Argument of Second party
For Argument of Second party
For Argument of Second party
For Argument of Second party
For Argument of Second party
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-05-2026 | For Argument of Second party |
| 02-05-2026 | For Argument of Second party |
| 18-04-2026 | For Argument of Second party |
| 10-04-2026 | For Argument of Second party |
| 13-03-2026 | For Argument of Second party |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: MAZDUR KALYAN SANGH v. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, G.M.T.B. (IT 85/2012) Outcome: The Industrial Tribunal partially allowed the petition. The tribunal directed that Respondents 1-3 (GMTB officers and contractor) must reinstate the workers and pay appropriate compensation, while rejecting certain demands regarding unauthorized employment arrangements and contractor liability. The tribunal found no valid employer-employee relationship between the contractor and workers that would support all claims, but upheld violations of labor standards requiring corrective action and monetary relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: MAZDUR KALYAN SANGH v. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, G.M.T.B. (IT 85/2012) Outcome: The Industrial Tribunal partially allowed the petition. The tribunal directed that Respondents 1-3 (GMTB officers and contractor) must reinstate the workers and pay appropriate compensation, while rejecting certain demands regarding unauthorized employment arrangements and contractor liability. The tribunal found no valid employer-employee relationship between the contractor and workers that would support all claims, but upheld violations of labor standards requiring corrective action and monetary relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts