Sunil Ramdas Dahikar vs The Registrar, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidhyapith, Akola Advocate - S.S.Rajderkar — 18/2022

Case under Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act Section 28. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 09th April 2026.

Complaint ULP

CNR: MHIC300000182022

EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

09th April 2026

Filing Number

18/2022

Filing Date

27-01-2022

Registration No

18/2022

Registration Date

27-01-2022

Court

Industrial Court, Akola

Judge

1-Member, Industrial Court, Akola.

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

Sunil Ramdas Dahikar

Adv. P. R.Dharmadhikari

Respondent(s)

The Registrar, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidhyapith, Akola Advocate - S.S.Rajderkar

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Member, Industrial Court, Akola.

06-03-2026

EVIDENCE

15-01-2026

EVIDENCE

14-11-2025

EVIDENCE

16-09-2025

EVIDENCE

24-07-2025

EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

17-03-2022
Order below Exh 2

Summary: The Industrial Court partly allowed the interim relief application filed by Sunil Ramdas Dahikar, a daily wage laborer employed since 2008 by Dr. Punjabrao Deshmukh Krushi Vidyapeeth, Akola. The court directed the respondent to continue the complainant's employment as per work availability and seniority while granting the respondent liberty to take lawful action following due procedure if contingency arises. The court found a partly made-out prima facie case of unfair labor practice but rejected the request for blanket employment protection, noting the employee worked on irregular daily-wage basis. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Industrial Court partly allowed the interim relief application filed by Sunil Ramdas Dahikar, a daily wage laborer employed since 2008 by Dr. Punjabrao Deshmukh Krushi Vidyapeeth, Akola. The court directed the respondent to continue the complainant's employment as per work availability and seniority while granting the respondent liberty to take lawful action following due procedure if contingency arises. The court found a partly made-out prima facie case of unfair labor practice but rejected the request for blanket employment protection, noting the employee worked on irregular daily-wage basis. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Industrial Court, Akola All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case