Rajeshwar Gajanan Dussawar vs M.S.R.T.C. Chandrapur Advocate - Deshpande Umesh Vijayrao — 57/2023
Case under Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 Section 28 30 2. Status: Hearing on Preliminary Issues. Next hearing: 17th April 2026.
Comp.ULP
CNR: MHLC340002662023
Next Hearing
17th April 2026
Filing Number
306/2023
Filing Date
01-11-2023
Registration No
57/2023
Registration Date
01-11-2023
Court
Labour Court,Chandrapur
Judge
1-Judge,Labour Court, Chandrapur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rajeshwar Gajanan Dussawar
Adv. Wankhade Milind Manoharrao
Respondent(s)
M.S.R.T.C. Chandrapur Advocate - Deshpande Umesh Vijayrao
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judge,Labour Court, Chandrapur
Hearing on Preliminary Issues
Hearing on Preliminary Issues
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Hearing on Preliminary Issues |
| 10-02-2026 | Hearing on Preliminary Issues |
| 02-01-2026 | Evidence |
| 05-12-2025 | Evidence |
| 07-11-2025 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary The Labour Court, Chandrapur allowed the interim relief application filed by bus conductor Rajeshwar Dussarwar under Section 30(2) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The court found that the complainant established a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience favors him, as the departmental enquiry against him violated principles of natural justice—specifically, the enquiry officer acted as a prosecutor, key witnesses were not examined, and proper reasoning was absent in the findings. The court restrained MSRTC from dismissing the complainant pending the main complaint's decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Labour Court, Chandrapur allowed the interim relief application filed by bus conductor Rajeshwar Dussarwar under Section 30(2) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The court found that the complainant established a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience favors him, as the departmental enquiry against him violated principles of natural justice—specifically, the enquiry officer acted as a prosecutor, key witnesses were not examined, and proper reasoning was absent in the findings. The court restrained MSRTC from dismissing the complainant pending the main complaint's decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts