LEGAL SECRETORY, SHRI A.G.MISHRA, SHRI VIDHYUT KAMDAR SANGH vs CHIEF ENGINEER SHRI, GUJART STATE ELECTORYCITY COMPANY Advocate - N.B.SHAH — 35/2016
Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 010,. Status: For award. Next hearing: 09th April 2026.
REF IT - REFERENCE I.T.
CNR: GJSR130001322016
Next Hearing
09th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
35/2016
Filing Date
08-06-2016
Registration No
35/2016
Registration Date
08-06-2016
Court
INDUSTRIAL COURT, SURAT
Judge
1-MEMBER, INDUSTRIAL COURT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
LEGAL SECRETORY, SHRI A.G.MISHRA, SHRI VIDHYUT KAMDAR SANGH
Adv. A.G.MIRZA
Respondent(s)
CHIEF ENGINEER SHRI, GUJART STATE ELECTORYCITY COMPANY Advocate - N.B.SHAH
Hearing History
Judge: 1-MEMBER, INDUSTRIAL COURT
For award
For Argument of first party
For Argument of first party
For Argument of first party
For Argument of first party
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | For award | |
| 06-03-2026 | For Argument of first party | |
| 13-02-2026 | For Argument of first party | |
| 30-01-2026 | For Argument of first party | |
| 09-01-2026 | For Argument of first party |
Interim Orders
Summary The petition by the first claimant is dismissed. The court rejected the first claimant's appeal against the second claimant's interim order (Reference I.T. No. 35-2016). The court held that the first claimant failed to produce necessary supporting documents and evidence in the custody of the first claimant to substantiate claims regarding salary fixation, promotion, and benefits; consequently, the interim relief sought could not be granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The petition by the first claimant is dismissed. The court rejected the first claimant's appeal against the second claimant's interim order (Reference I.T. No. 35-2016). The court held that the first claimant failed to produce necessary supporting documents and evidence in the custody of the first claimant to substantiate claims regarding salary fixation, promotion, and benefits; consequently, the interim relief sought could not be granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts