M.M.KATHIRIYA BEHALF OF Government of Gujarat vs GANDHI MAYANKUMAR PRAVINCHANDRA — 61/2026

Case under Minimum Wages Act, 1948 Section 22A. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJPT020000742026

Filing Number

61/2026

Filing Date

02-Jan-2026

Registration No

61/2026

Registration Date

02-Jan-2026

Court

CIVIL COURT PATAN

Judge

11-Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 16-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Minimum Wages Act, 1948 Section 22A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M.M.KATHIRIYA BEHALF OF Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.GANDHI MAYANKUMAR PRAVINCHANDRA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Patan convicted Mayankumar Pravinchandra Gandhi under Section 22 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, for violating provisions regarding minimum wages, overtime registers, and wage slips. The court sentenced him to a fine of ₹5,000 or 30 days simple imprisonment in default, considering his first offense, financial hardship, and assurance of future compliance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  6. 03-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 02-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 61/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Patan convicted Mayankumar Pravinchandra Gandhi under Section 22 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, for violating provisions regarding minimum wages, overtime registers, and wage slips. The court sentenced him to a fine of ₹5,000 or 30 days simple imprisonment in default, considering his first offense, financial hardship, and assurance of future compliance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case