Moreshwar Anandrao Nikhare vs M.S.R.T.C. Chandrapur Advocate - Patil Bhaskar Mansaram — 12/2023
Case under Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act 1971 Section 28. Status: Respondents Evidence. Next hearing: 08th April 2026.
Comp. ULP
CNR: MHIC340000122023
Next Hearing
08th April 2026
Filing Number
12/2023
Filing Date
02-02-2023
Registration No
12/2023
Registration Date
02-02-2023
Court
Industrial Court,Chandrapur
Judge
1-Member
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Moreshwar Anandrao Nikhare
Adv. Shri V.M. Shikare, Representative
Respondent(s)
M.S.R.T.C. Chandrapur Advocate - Patil Bhaskar Mansaram
The Assistt.Mechanical Engineer ,M.S.R.T.C.Workshop Tukum Chandrpaur
Adv. Patil Bhaskar Mansaram
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Member
Respondents Evidence
Order
Hearing on Preliminary Issues
Hearing on Preliminary Issues
Hearing on Preliminary Issues
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Respondents Evidence |
| 04-03-2026 | Order |
| 18-02-2026 | Hearing on Preliminary Issues |
| 28-01-2026 | Hearing on Preliminary Issues |
| 18-12-2025 | Hearing on Preliminary Issues |
Interim Orders
Case Summary The Industrial Court, Chandrapur answered two preliminary issues in the negative: finding that the domestic enquiry procedure against Assistant Artisan Moreshwar Nikhare was neither legal, proper, nor just, and that the enquiry officer's findings were perverse. The court identified critical procedural violations, including the enquiry officer acting simultaneously as investigator, prosecutor, and judge; failure to examine vital eyewitnesses; and reliance on inadmissible hearsay evidence from the reporting officer. The respondent M.S.R.T.C. Chandrapur was granted liberty to reprove the charges against the complainant before the court through fresh evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The Industrial Court, Chandrapur answered two preliminary issues in the negative: finding that the domestic enquiry procedure against Assistant Artisan Moreshwar Nikhare was neither legal, proper, nor just, and that the enquiry officer's findings were perverse. The court identified critical procedural violations, including the enquiry officer acting simultaneously as investigator, prosecutor, and judge; failure to examine vital eyewitnesses; and reliance on inadmissible hearsay evidence from the reporting officer. The respondent M.S.R.T.C. Chandrapur was granted liberty to reprove the charges against the complainant before the court through fresh evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts