SHRI D. S. BALYA, GOVERNMENT LABOUR OFFICER AND INSPECTOR UNDER MINIMUM WAGES ACT, TAPI vs PRASHANT SECURITY SERVICES, (ESTABLISHMENT) — 217/2026
Case under Minimum Wages Act, 1948 Section 22A,18,26D,26(2),26B(1),21(1)(i). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJSR140003562026
Filing Number
217/2026
Filing Date
04-02-2026
Registration No
217/2026
Registration Date
04-02-2026
Court
LABOUR COURT, SURAT
Judge
1-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SHRI D. S. BALYA, GOVERNMENT LABOUR OFFICER AND INSPECTOR UNDER MINIMUM WAGES ACT, TAPI
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
PRASHANT SECURITY SERVICES, (ESTABLISHMENT)
SHRI SUNILKUMAR CHAUDHARY, (PARTNERSHRI)
Hearing History
Judge: 1-JUDGE, LABOUR COURT
Disposed
PLEA
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-03-2026 | PLEA |
| 28-02-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case 217/2026 Summary: The court convicted Prashant Security Services and partner Sunil Kumar Chaudhary of violating the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and Gujarat Rules 1961 (Rules 26(D), 26(2), 26(B)(1), 21(1)). After the defendants voluntarily confessed to the charges, the court imposed a fine of Rs. 2,000 per violation (totaling Rs. 16,000), with 10 days simple imprisonment as alternate punishment if the fine remains unpaid, considering mitigating factors like absence of criminal intent and business impact. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case 217/2026 Summary: The court convicted Prashant Security Services and partner Sunil Kumar Chaudhary of violating the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and Gujarat Rules 1961 (Rules 26(D), 26(2), 26(B)(1), 21(1)). After the defendants voluntarily confessed to the charges, the court imposed a fine of Rs. 2,000 per violation (totaling Rs. 16,000), with 10 days simple imprisonment as alternate punishment if the fine remains unpaid, considering mitigating factors like absence of criminal intent and business impact. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts