PARMAR PUSHPABEN SHAILESHBHAI vs HILLWELL HOMIO PVT LTD Advocate - Y M SHAH — 67/2022
Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10,. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.
REFER T LC - Referance T
CNR: GJGN060002052022
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
67/2022
Filing Date
07-10-2022
Registration No
67/2022
Registration Date
07-10-2022
Court
LABOUR COURT, KALOL
Judge
1-JUDGE LABOUR COURT KALOL
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--LOK ADALAT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
PARMAR PUSHPABEN SHAILESHBHAI
Adv. K C VEKARIYA
Respondent(s)
HILLWELL HOMIO PVT LTD Advocate - Y M SHAH
KESHAR LABOUR CONTRACTOR
Adv. J L DESAI
Hearing History
Judge: 1-JUDGE LABOUR COURT KALOL
Disposed
For Evidence of opponent
For Evidence of opponent
For Evidence of opponent
For Evidence of opponent
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 06-03-2026 | For Evidence of opponent | |
| 06-02-2026 | For Evidence of opponent | |
| 23-01-2026 | For Evidence of opponent | |
| 02-01-2026 | For Evidence of opponent |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Labour Court (S.D.), Kalol decided a reference case involving Pushpaben Shaileshbhai Parmar, an employee who was terminated after 14 years of service. The court found merit in the employee's claim and ordered reinstatement with full back wages of ₹35,000 (plus arrears) to be paid within 15 days, while rejecting the employer's contentions that the termination was justified. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Labour Court (S.D.), Kalol decided a reference case involving Pushpaben Shaileshbhai Parmar, an employee who was terminated after 14 years of service. The court found merit in the employee's claim and ordered reinstatement with full back wages of ₹35,000 (plus arrears) to be paid within 15 days, while rejecting the employer's contentions that the termination was justified. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts