Writ petition challenging the Industrial Court's rejection of a delay condonation application for a complaint under Item 9 of Schedule IV of the MRTU and PULP Act seeking retiral benefits. The High Court declined to interfere and dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2024:BHC-NAG:5970
31-cwp-1086-24.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1086 OF 2024
Madhukar N. Anasane Versus
...Petitioner
Zilla Parishad, Amravati and anr. ...Respondents
Adv. Payal S. Kaware for the Petitioner. Adv. J.B. Kasat for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
CORAM : N. R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 11 JUNE 2024.
PC:-
1/2
Dinesh S. Sherla
31-cwp-1086-24.doc
respondents rejected the said application by order dated 5.10.2001. It appears that the Additional Commissioner, Amravati by order dated 14.10.2002 had dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the said order dated 5.10.2001. It further appears that even writ petition was filed before this Court and the same was not entertained.
2/2
Dinesh S. Sherla
Signed by: DINESH SHERLA Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 12/06/2024 16:47:55
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Industrial Court rightly rejected the petitioner's delay condonation application for filing an unfair labour practice complaint regarding retiral benefits.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Madhukar N. Anasane
Zilla Parishad, Amravati
Respondent No. 2
N. R. Borkar
As recorded by the court registry
4 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
