DR. G. V. SAVANI, GOVERNMENT LABOUR OFFICER AND GRATUITY PAYMENT INSPECTOR, SURAT vs KIRTI HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED, (COMPANY) — 47/2026

Case under The Payment of Gratuity (Gujarat) Rules, 1973 Section 6(7),6(2). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJSR140000622026

Filing Number

47/2026

Filing Date

03-Jan-2026

Registration No

47/2026

Registration Date

03-Jan-2026

Court

LABOUR COURT, SURAT

Judge

2-Judge, Labour Court

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 12-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

The Payment of Gratuity (Gujarat) Rules, 1973 Section 6(7),6(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DR. G. V. SAVANI, GOVERNMENT LABOUR OFFICER AND GRATUITY PAYMENT INSPECTOR, SURAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KIRTI HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED, (COMPANY)

  2. 2.JOY KIRTIKANT SHAH, (DIRECTORSHRI)

  3. 3.MEGHA JOY, (DIRECTORSHRI)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The Gujarat High Court convicted the accused under IPC Section 275 and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 Section 275, read with rules regarding Payment of Gratuity Act violation. The court imposed a fine of ₹10,000 per accused (with 10-day imprisonment as default), and ordered a total fine of ₹30,000, finding the accused guilty of voluntary confession and conclusive evidence of the offense despite educational sentencing being an alternative option. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Judge, Labour Court

  4. 07-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    Judge, Labour Court

  5. 21-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 03-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 47/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Gujarat High Court convicted the accused under IPC Section 275 and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 Section 275, read with rules regarding Payment of Gratuity Act violation. The court imposed a fine of ₹10,000 per accused (with 10-day imprisonment as default), and ordered a total fine of ₹30,000, finding the accused guilty of voluntary confession and conclusive evidence of the offense despite educational sentencing being an alternative option. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case