DILIPBHAI NANABHAI VADI vs ADHIKSHAK EJNERSHRI PANAM YOJANA VARTUL, GODHRA — 119/2025
Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10. Disposed: Uncontested--JUDGEMENT on 07th May 2026.
REFER T LC - Referance T
CNR: GJPM130006632025
Filing Number
119/2025
Filing Date
01-08-2025
Registration No
119/2025
Registration Date
01-08-2025
Court
LABOUR COURT, GODHRA
Judge
3-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT (JD)
Decision Date
07th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--JUDGEMENT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
DILIPBHAI NANABHAI VADI
Adv. S A BHOI
Respondent(s)
ADHIKSHAK EJNERSHRI PANAM YOJANA VARTUL, GODHRA
NAYAB KARYPALAK EJNERSHRI BHADAR NAHER VITRAN PETA VIBHAG LUNAVADA
Hearing History
Judge: 3-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT (JD)
Disposed
For Statement of Claim
For Statement of Claim
For Statement of Claim
For Statement of Claim
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-03-2026 | For Statement of Claim |
| 27-01-2026 | For Statement of Claim |
| 05-12-2025 | For Statement of Claim |
| 27-10-2025 | For Statement of Claim |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: The Labour Court, Godhra dismissed petitioner Dilipbhai Nanabhai Vadi's reference under Industrial Disputes Act 1947, Section 10(1)(d) seeking reinstatement with full back wages. The court found that the respondent (Second Party) failed to appear despite notice, did not file a written statement, and provided no supporting documents or evidence to defend its position. The court concluded that since the case had been pending since 2025 without substantive progress or the respondent's participation, the reference should be dismissed without granting any relief regarding back wages. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: The Labour Court, Godhra dismissed petitioner Dilipbhai Nanabhai Vadi's reference under Industrial Disputes Act 1947, Section 10(1)(d) seeking reinstatement with full back wages. The court found that the respondent (Second Party) failed to appear despite notice, did not file a written statement, and provided no supporting documents or evidence to defend its position. The court concluded that since the case had been pending since 2025 without substantive progress or the respondent's participation, the reference should be dismissed without granting any relief regarding back wages. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts