Malake Sikandarmiya Subamiya vs Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Lmited Advocate - M.G.Memon — 149/2024

Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10(1)(c). Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 01st April 2026.

REFER T LC - Referance T

CNR: GJKH140003222024

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

149/2024

Filing Date

15-07-2024

Registration No

149/2024

Registration Date

15-07-2024

Court

LABOUR COURT, NADIAD

Judge

1-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT

Decision Date

01st April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

Acts & Sections

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947 Section 10(1)(c)

Petitioner(s)

Malake Sikandarmiya Subamiya

Adv. D.H.Shah

Respondent(s)

Ceema Electricals Lighting Products India Pvt Lmited Advocate - M.G.Memon

Om Shiva Enterprise

Hearing History

Judge: 1-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT

01-04-2026

Disposed

23-03-2026

For award

16-03-2026

For Argument of Second party

09-03-2026

For Evidence of first party

05-03-2026

For Evidence of Second party

Final Orders / Judgements

01-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Court Decision Summary The court partially allowed the worker's appeal, finding him to be an employee of Samavala No. 1 (the principal employer) rather than the contractor. The court awarded reinstatement with back wages of ₹50,000 plus future salary from the date of termination, rejecting the argument that employment through a contractor breaks the employer-employee relationship. The court emphasized that control, supervision, and wage payment determine actual employment status, not merely contractual arrangements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The court partially allowed the worker's appeal, finding him to be an employee of Samavala No. 1 (the principal employer) rather than the contractor. The court awarded reinstatement with back wages of ₹50,000 plus future salary from the date of termination, rejecting the argument that employment through a contractor breaks the employer-employee relationship. The court emphasized that control, supervision, and wage payment determine actual employment status, not merely contractual arrangements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

LABOUR COURT, NADIAD All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case