Babasaheb Bhaurao Gore vs The Chairman,Shri Sant Eknath Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana ltd and othes 2 Advocate - S.V.Dankh — 148/2019
Case under Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act 1971 Section 26,28. Status: Respondent Evidence. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.
COMPLAINT ULP
CNR: MHIC200004462019
Filing Number
907/2019
Filing Date
02-Dec-2019
Registration No
148/2019
Registration Date
02-Dec-2019
Court
Industrial Court, Aurangabad
Judge
1-Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
Last updated 26-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Babasaheb Bhaurao Gore
Adv. R.R.Imale
Respondent(s)
-
1.The Chairman,Shri Sant Eknath Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana ltd and othes 2 Advocate - S.V.Dankh
Case History
-
27-Apr-2026
Next hearingPending
-
06-Mar-2026
Respondent Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
23-Jan-2026
Respondent Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
05-Dec-2025
Respondent Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
14-Nov-2025
Respondent Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
19-Sep-2025
Respondent Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
01-Aug-2025
Argument Below Exh.
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
22-Jul-2025
Argument Below Exh.
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
29-Apr-2025
Argument Below Exh.
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
11-Mar-2025
Argument Below Exh.
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
04-Feb-2025
Respondent Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
13-Jan-2025
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
05-Dec-2024
Copy of Order Below ExhibitView PDF
Summary: The Industrial Court at Aurangabad rejected the respondents' application seeking dismissal of an unfair labour practice complaint filed by Babasaheb Gore against the sugar factory management. The court found that the complainant was not bound by a previous High Court order in a related writ petition, as there was no evidence the respondents had complied with their undertakings, and the complaint raises distinct claims regarding unpaid wages, bonus, and gratuity. The application was rejected with costs, and the proceedings were directed to be expedited. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
05-Dec-2024
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
15-Nov-2024
Order on Exh..... R
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
21-Sep-2024
Argument Below Exh.
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
12-Jul-2024
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
20-Mar-2024
Copy of Order Below ExhibitView PDF
-
20-Mar-2024
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
06-Mar-2024
Order on Exh..... R
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
11-Dec-2023
Order on Exh..... R
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
05-Oct-2023
Order on Exh..... R
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
05-Sep-2023
Order on Exh..... R
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
17-Jun-2023
Order on Exh..... R
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
06-Apr-2023
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
07-Feb-2023
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
15-Nov-2022
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
20-Jul-2022
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
07-Apr-2022
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
15-Dec-2021
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
14-Oct-2021
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
05-Oct-2021
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
20-Apr-2021
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
11-Feb-2021
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
22-Dec-2020
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
14-Oct-2020
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
11-Jun-2020
Evidence
Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad.
-
04-Mar-2020
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
02-Dec-2019
Case filed
Registration No. 148/2019
Summary: The Industrial Court at Aurangabad rejected the respondents' application seeking dismissal of an unfair labour practice complaint filed by Babasaheb Gore against the sugar factory management. The court found that the complainant was not bound by a previous High Court order in a related writ petition, as there was no evidence the respondents had complied with their undertakings, and the complaint raises distinct claims regarding unpaid wages, bonus, and gratuity. The application was rejected with costs, and the proceedings were directed to be expedited. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts