Girish Ashandas Vasani vs GENERAL MANAGER, HR, GRASIM IND.LTD., UNIT INDIAN REYON, VERAVAL Advocate - H D RATHOD — 44/2025
Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF on 16th March 2026.
REFER T LC - Referance T
CNR: GJJN160004322025
Filing Number
44/2025
Filing Date
15-07-2025
Registration No
44/2025
Registration Date
15-07-2025
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)
Girish Ashandas Vasani
Adv. H V DHORAJIYA
Respondent(s)
GENERAL MANAGER, HR, GRASIM IND.LTD., UNIT INDIAN REYON, VERAVAL 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 |
| 05-03-2026 | For Evidence of first party |
| 02-03-2026 | For Evidence of Second party |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Girish Ashandas Vasani v. General Manager, HR, Grasim Industries Ltd. Labour Court Decision (REF(T) No. 44/2025, Junagadh) The Labour Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, ordering reinstatement with back wages. Vasani was illegally terminated from his temporary position on 4/7/2001 without notice, despite performing casual work for the company since 1975. The 24-year delay in raising the dispute was justified because management failed to address his departmental appeal, and reinstatement after such prolonged service is legally warranted under Industrial Disputes Act principles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Girish Ashandas Vasani v. General Manager, HR, Grasim Industries Ltd. Labour Court Decision (REF(T) No. 44/2025, Junagadh) The Labour Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, ordering reinstatement with back wages. Vasani was illegally terminated from his temporary position on 4/7/2001 without notice, despite performing casual work for the company since 1975. The 24-year delay in raising the dispute was justified because management failed to address his departmental appeal, and reinstatement after such prolonged service is legally warranted under Industrial Disputes Act principles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts