Jaynti Bhikhabhai Ramani vs Kary Palak Ijnershri Rajkot Advocate - A G P — 80/2024

Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 24th March 2026.

Case disposed

REFER T LC - Referance T

CNR: GJJM130004332024

Filing Number

80/2024

Filing Date

02-Dec-2024

Registration No

80/2024

Registration Date

02-Dec-2024

Court

LABOUR COURT, JAMNAGAR

Judge

1-Judge, Labour Court

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

Last updated 24-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Jaynti Bhikhabhai Ramani

    Adv. P R JOSHI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Kary Palak Ijnershri Rajkot Advocate - A G P

  2. 2.Nayab Kary Palak Ijnerdshri Dharol

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary: Case 80/2024 - Jaynti Bhikhabhai Ramani v. Executive Engineer & Nayab Executive Engineer The court rejected the petitioner's (Jaynti Bhikhabhai Ramani's) industrial dispute reference. The petitioner, a daily-wage laborer employed since 1999, claimed wrongful termination without notice or severance in July 2011. The court found the respondent failed to prove proper dismissal procedures under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, particularly Section 25(F) requirements. However, the court dismissed the reference due to excessive delay—the case was filed 13 years after termination, violating the one-year statutory period for raising industrial disputes under amended provisions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Judge, Labour Court

  4. 20-Mar-2026

    For Order

    Judge, Labour Court

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    For Order

    Judge, Labour Court

  6. 11-Feb-2026

    For Order

    Judge, Labour Court

  7. 28-Jan-2026

    For Arguement of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  8. 21-Jan-2026

    For Arguement of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  9. 31-Dec-2025

    For Arguement of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  10. 24-Dec-2025

    For Evidence of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court

  11. 20-Dec-2025

    For Evidence of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court

  12. 17-Dec-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  13. 10-Dec-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  14. 26-Nov-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  15. 12-Nov-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  16. 15-Oct-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  17. 08-Oct-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  18. 24-Sep-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  19. 10-Sep-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  20. 20-Aug-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  21. 16-Jul-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  22. 18-Jun-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  23. 21-May-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  24. 09-Apr-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  25. 26-Mar-2025

    For Evidence of Applicant

    Judge, Labour Court

  26. 12-Mar-2025

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court

  27. 05-Mar-2025

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court

  28. 19-Feb-2025

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court

  29. 22-Jan-2025

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court

  30. 08-Jan-2025

    For Reply of opponent

    Judge, Labour Court

  31. 18-Dec-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  32. 02-Dec-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 80/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: Case 80/2024 - Jaynti Bhikhabhai Ramani v. Executive Engineer & Nayab Executive Engineer The court rejected the petitioner's (Jaynti Bhikhabhai Ramani's) industrial dispute reference. The petitioner, a daily-wage laborer employed since 1999, claimed wrongful termination without notice or severance in July 2011. The court found the respondent failed to prove proper dismissal procedures under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, particularly Section 25(F) requirements. However, the court dismissed the reference due to excessive delay—the case was filed 13 years after termination, violating the one-year statutory period for raising industrial disputes under amended provisions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case