Nilesh Devidasrao Rane vs Divisional Controller, M.S.R.T.C. Amravati and 1 Advocate - S.W. Gawande — 77/2020

Case under Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 Section 28,30(2). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 29th April 2026.

Complaint ULP

CNR: MHIC270001622020

Evidence

Next Hearing

29th April 2026

Filing Number

195/2020

Filing Date

14-12-2020

Registration No

77/2020

Registration Date

14-12-2020

Court

Industrial Court, Amravati

Judge

1-Member, Industrial Court, Amravati.

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union And Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 Section 28,30(2)

Petitioner(s)

Nilesh Devidasrao Rane

Adv. D.B. Gawande

Respondent(s)

Divisional Controller, M.S.R.T.C. Amravati and 1 Advocate - S.W. Gawande

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Member, Industrial Court, Amravati.

06-03-2026

Evidence

17-01-2026

Evidence

27-11-2025

Evidence

24-09-2025

Evidence

01-08-2025

Evidence

Interim Orders

14-12-2020
Order on Exhibit

Summary: The Industrial Court at Amravati rejected the complainant's interim application seeking to stay the implementation of a punishment order (withholding two annual increments) imposed for a bus accident caused on 27-06-2018. The court allowed the respondents' application for time to file their reply and written statement, finding prima facie that the complainant was responsible for the accident and noting a pattern of repeated accidents. The court also declined to grant any interim relief or status quo protection pending the respondents' response. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Industrial Court at Amravati rejected the complainant's interim application seeking to stay the implementation of a punishment order (withholding two annual increments) imposed for a bus accident caused on 27-06-2018. The court allowed the respondents' application for time to file their reply and written statement, finding prima facie that the complainant was responsible for the accident and noting a pattern of repeated accidents. The court also declined to grant any interim relief or status quo protection pending the respondents' response. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Industrial Court, Amravati All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case