Vilas Maruti Kadam vs Divisional Controller, S. T. Sangli. and ors. 1 Advocate - Yadav Dhairyasheel Shamarao — 18/2023

Case under Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act Section 28. Status: Cross Examination. Next hearing: 22nd April 2026.

Complaint ULP

CNR: MHIC100000402023

Cross Examination

Next Hearing

22nd April 2026

Filing Number

54/2023

Filing Date

12-05-2023

Registration No

18/2023

Registration Date

12-05-2023

Court

Industrial Court ,Sangli

Judge

1-Member, Industrial Court, Sangli

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act Section 28

Petitioner(s)

Vilas Maruti Kadam

Adv. Mutaalik Sanadiip Shashikant

Respondent(s)

Divisional Controller, S. T. Sangli. and ors. 1 Advocate - Yadav Dhairyasheel Shamarao

Divisional Traffic Officer, S. T. Sangli.

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Member, Industrial Court, Sangli

16-03-2026

Cross Examination

06-03-2026

Hearing below Exh._______

06-02-2026

Hearing below Exh._______

16-01-2026

Hearing below Exh._______

12-12-2025

Hearing below Exh._______

Interim Orders

16-03-2026
Order Below Exb.

The Industrial Court at Sangli allowed the respondent's application to frame an additional issue regarding the maintainability of the complaint. The court framed Issue No. 2(a): "Whether the present complaint is pre-mature and hence not maintainable?" to be decided on merit later, noting the respondent's contention that the domestic inquiry had not concluded. The complainant's argument regarding retirement on 31.5.2023 was deferred for consideration during final adjudication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The Industrial Court at Sangli allowed the respondent's application to frame an additional issue regarding the maintainability of the complaint. The court framed Issue No. 2(a): "Whether the present complaint is pre-mature and hence not maintainable?" to be decided on merit later, noting the respondent's contention that the domestic inquiry had not concluded. The complainant's argument regarding retirement on 31.5.2023 was deferred for consideration during final adjudication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Industrial Court ,Sangli All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case