Municipal Transport Workers Union vs Kolhapur Municipal Transport Advocate - P. R. Rane — 162/2021
Case under Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 Section 28. Status: Cross Examination. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.
Complaint ULP
CNR: MHIC090003652021
Next Hearing
27th April 2026
Filing Number
5000367/2021
Filing Date
14-10-2021
Registration No
162/2021
Registration Date
20-10-2021
Court
Industrial Court, Kolhapur
Judge
1-Member, Industrial Court No. 1
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Municipal Transport Workers Union
Adv. V. S. Chavan
Balkrishna Ramchandra Jadhav
Adv. V. S. Chavan
Respondent(s)
Kolhapur Municipal Transport Advocate - P. R. Rane
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Member, Industrial Court No. 1
Cross Examination
Cross Examination
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Cross Examination |
| 18-02-2026 | Cross Examination |
| 20-01-2026 | Evidence |
| 23-12-2025 | Evidence |
| 10-12-2025 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary: The Industrial Court No. 1, Maharashtra at Kolhapur rejected the respondent's application seeking production of caveats filed by the complainant union before the Labour Court and Trade Union Registrar. The court found that the respondent failed to demonstrate the relevance of these documents to the complaint's adjudication and that the locus-standi issue had already been raised in a prior application, which would be addressed at the appropriate stage of proceedings. The application was dismissed as devoid of merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Industrial Court No. 1, Maharashtra at Kolhapur rejected the respondent's application seeking production of caveats filed by the complainant union before the Labour Court and Trade Union Registrar. The court found that the respondent failed to demonstrate the relevance of these documents to the complaint's adjudication and that the locus-standi issue had already been raised in a prior application, which would be addressed at the appropriate stage of proceedings. The application was dismissed as devoid of merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts