Dinesh Sudhakar Mutthakar vs M.S.R.T.C. Gadchiroli through its Divisional contrloller Advocate - Patil Bhaskar Mansaram — 54/2023
Case under Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act 1971 Section 28. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 01st April 2026.
Comp. ULP
CNR: MHIC340000822023
Next Hearing
01st April 2026
Filing Number
84/2023
Filing Date
26-07-2023
Registration No
54/2023
Registration Date
26-07-2023
Court
Industrial Court,Chandrapur
Judge
1-Member
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Dinesh Sudhakar Mutthakar
Adv. Shri V.M. Shikare, Representative
Respondent(s)
M.S.R.T.C. Gadchiroli through its Divisional contrloller Advocate - Patil Bhaskar Mansaram
Divisional Traffic Supdt. DFL MSRTC Gadchiroi
Adv. Patil Bhaskar Mansaram
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Member
Evidence
Hearing on Preliminary Issues
Hearing on Preliminary Issues
Hearing on Preliminary Issues
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 04-03-2026 | Hearing on Preliminary Issues |
| 20-02-2026 | Hearing on Preliminary Issues |
| 06-01-2026 | Hearing on Preliminary Issues |
| 20-11-2025 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary: The Industrial Court, Chandrapur upheld the disciplinary proceedings against Dinesh Sudhakar Muthalkar, a bus conductor with Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, finding the enquiry procedure legal, proper, and just. The court affirmed that the enquiry officer's findings—that the complainant failed to issue tickets to 10 passengers despite collecting fares from them—were legal, proper, and not perverse. The matter is now scheduled for evidence hearing on the proportionality of the punishment (withholding of two future increments). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Industrial Court, Chandrapur upheld the disciplinary proceedings against Dinesh Sudhakar Muthalkar, a bus conductor with Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, finding the enquiry procedure legal, proper, and just. The court affirmed that the enquiry officer's findings—that the complainant failed to issue tickets to 10 passengers despite collecting fares from them—were legal, proper, and not perverse. The matter is now scheduled for evidence hearing on the proportionality of the punishment (withholding of two future increments). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts