Ajaz Ahemad Shaikh Chand vs Divisional Controller MSRTC Buldana Advocate - Kashikar RM — 5/2025
Case under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 33. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT on 06th March 2026.
Appln-IDA - Application
CNR: MHLC280000852025
Filing Number
88/2025
Filing Date
16-07-2025
Registration No
5/2025
Registration Date
16-07-2025
Court
Labour Court,Buldhana
Judge
1-Judge, Labour Court
Decision Date
06th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ajaz Ahemad Shaikh Chand
Adv. Gawande GR
Respondent(s)
Divisional Controller MSRTC Buldana Advocate - Kashikar RM
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judge, Labour Court
Disposed
Argument
Argument
Cross Examination
Cross Examination
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 27-02-2026 | Argument |
| 20-02-2026 | Argument |
| 13-02-2026 | Cross Examination |
| 07-02-2026 | Cross Examination |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The court granted the applicant's petition under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Section 33-C(2), directing the respondent (Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation) to pay the applicant Rs. 1,04,896 as the balance of salary arrears along with 10% interest from February 21, 2025, payable within 30 days. The court found that while the applicant was entitled to the full wage differential amount calculated for the period from service confirmation through retirement, the respondent had already paid Rs. 6,39,892 in a previous case judgment, leaving only the remaining balance due. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary The court granted the applicant's petition under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Section 33-C(2), directing the respondent (Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation) to pay the applicant Rs. 1,04,896 as the balance of salary arrears along with 10% interest from February 21, 2025, payable within 30 days. The court found that while the applicant was entitled to the full wage differential amount calculated for the period from service confirmation through retirement, the respondent had already paid Rs. 6,39,892 in a previous case judgment, leaving only the remaining balance due. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts