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
Next Hearing
27th April 2026
Filing Number
907/2019
Filing Date
02-12-2019
Registration No
148/2019
Registration Date
02-12-2019
Court
Industrial Court, Aurangabad
Judge
1-MEMBER, INDUSTRIAL COURT, AURANGABAD.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Babasaheb Bhaurao Gore
Adv. R.R.Imale
Respondent(s)
The Chairman,Shri Sant Eknath Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana ltd and othes 2 Advocate - S.V.Dankh
Hearing History
Judge: 1-MEMBER, INDUSTRIAL COURT, AURANGABAD.
Respondent Evidence
Respondent Evidence
Respondent Evidence
Respondent Evidence
Respondent Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Respondent Evidence |
| 23-01-2026 | Respondent Evidence |
| 05-12-2025 | Respondent Evidence |
| 14-11-2025 | Respondent Evidence |
| 19-09-2025 | Respondent Evidence |
Interim Orders
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.
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.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts