Gulamhusen Vilmahmad Panja vs Grasim Industries Limited, Unit Indian Reyon Advocate - H D RATHOD — 15/2025
Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF on 16th March 2026.
REFER T LC - Referance T
CNR: GJJN160003192025
Filing Number
15/2025
Filing Date
19-06-2025
Registration No
15/2025
Registration Date
19-06-2025
Court
LABOUR COURT, JUNAGADH
Judge
1-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT (JD)
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OF
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Gulamhusen Vilmahmad Panja
Adv. H V DHORAJIYA
Respondent(s)
Grasim Industries Limited, Unit Indian Reyon Advocate - H D RATHOD
Hearing History
Judge: 1-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT (JD)
Disposed
For award
For Argument of Second party
For Evidence of first party
For Evidence of Second party
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | For award |
| 09-03-2026 | For Argument of Second party |
| 02-03-2026 | For Evidence of first party |
| 02-02-2026 | For Evidence of Second party |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: REF(T) No. 15/2025 Court Decision: The Labour Court dismissed the worker's (Gulamhusen Vilmahmad Panja) petition for reinstatement against Grasim Industries Limited, finding the industrial dispute reference invalid due to unexplained 24-year delay in raising the claim after termination on 4 July 2001. The court held that without sufficient cause explaining such inordinate delay, the dispute became stale and did not constitute a "live dispute" under Industrial Disputes Act Section 2(k). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: REF(T) No. 15/2025 Court Decision: The Labour Court dismissed the worker's (Gulamhusen Vilmahmad Panja) petition for reinstatement against Grasim Industries Limited, finding the industrial dispute reference invalid due to unexplained 24-year delay in raising the claim after termination on 4 July 2001. The court held that without sufficient cause explaining such inordinate delay, the dispute became stale and did not constitute a "live dispute" under Industrial Disputes Act Section 2(k). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts