SATHVARA JAGDISH MANUBHAI vs THE ARVIND LTD. Advocate - B K OZA — 36/2024

Case under Gujarat Industrial Relation Act, 1946 Section 79,1. Status: For Evidence of Applicant. Next hearing: 03rd April 2026.

For Evidence of Applicant Next hearing 03-Apr-2026 this date has passed

TAPP LC - Application for Termination

CNR: GJGN060002212024

Filing Number

36/2024

Filing Date

03-Jul-2024

Registration No

36/2024

Registration Date

03-Jul-2024

Court

LABOUR COURT, KALOL

Judge

1-Judge Labour Court Kalol

Last updated 21-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat Industrial Relation Act, 1946 Section 79,1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SATHVARA JAGDISH MANUBHAI

    Adv. A N PATEL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE ARVIND LTD. Advocate - B K OZA

Case History

  1. 03-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge Labour Court Kalol

  3. 06-Feb-2026

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge Labour Court Kalol

  4. 09-Jan-2026

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge Labour Court Kalol

  5. 20-Dec-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge Labour Court Kalol

  6. 15-Nov-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge Labour Court Kalol

  7. 04-Oct-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge Labour Court Kalol

  8. 02-Sep-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge Labour Court Kalol

  9. 07-Aug-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge Labour Court Kalol

  10. 15-Jul-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge Labour Court Kalol

  11. 17-Jun-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge Labour Court Kalol

  12. 27-May-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge Labour Court Kalol

  13. 29-Apr-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  14. 22-Apr-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  15. 15-Apr-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  16. 05-Apr-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  17. 15-Mar-2025

    OrderView PDF

    Court Order Summary Case: BIR Interim Application No. 36-2024, Labour Court, Kalol Outcome: The interim application seeking interim relief (maintenance allowance at 75% of wages pending case disposal) was dismissed/rejected. The court held that an employee terminated from service is not entitled to interim maintenance allowance under Section 119(D) of the Gujarat Industrial Relations Act, 1946, as such relief is only available to suspended employees, not discharged ones. The court found no prima facie case, irreparable harm, or balance of convenience favoring the applicant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  18. 15-Mar-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  19. 11-Mar-2025

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  20. 27-Feb-2025

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  21. 11-Feb-2025

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  22. 01-Feb-2025

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  23. 04-Jan-2025

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  24. 21-Dec-2024

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  25. 22-Oct-2024

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  26. 05-Oct-2024

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  27. 03-Sep-2024

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  28. 06-Aug-2024

    For Notice Serve to opponent

    Judge, Labour Court (Jd)

  29. 03-Jul-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  30. 03-Jul-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 36/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary Case: BIR Interim Application No. 36-2024, Labour Court, Kalol Outcome: The interim application seeking interim relief (maintenance allowance at 75% of wages pending case disposal) was dismissed/rejected. The court held that an employee terminated from service is not entitled to interim maintenance allowance under Section 119(D) of the Gujarat Industrial Relations Act, 1946, as such relief is only available to suspended employees, not discharged ones. The court found no prima facie case, irreparable harm, or balance of convenience favoring the applicant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case