1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.5807/2009. : : State of Rajasthan Vs. Prabhulal Meena & Ors. : : Date of Order 10.8.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Chetan Bairwa, Addl.Govt.Counsel for the State. This writ petition has been filed by the respondent-State against the order dated 26.7.2001 by which the Payment of Wages Authority has directed that each of the respondent-workmen paid a sum of Rs.34,320/- for unpaid wages and a sum of Rs.2000/- each for the compensation. The order was passed on the basis of evidence that they actually worked with petitioner-State, but their wages were not paid. The learned Authority has passed this order on the basis of evidence that was adduced including that of the above referred to workmen and other witnesses namely; PW.1 Ansar, PW.2 Ramdayal Jangid, PW.3 Allahnoor, PW.4 Prabhulal and PW.5 Amarchand. As against that, evidence of the concerned Assistant Engineer Shri K. K. 2 Tripathi was recorded as DW.1 and three more witnesses were produced by the petitioner. The question whether or not the respondent actually worked for the petitioner was essential by a question of fact. The appeal filed by the petitioner was also dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, (Fast Track), Sawai Madhopur. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that appeal was dismissed on the ground of delay and, therefore, the matter should be remanded back to the Payment of Wages Authority giving opportunity to the petitioner to now adduce further evidence and that even if there was delay on behalf of Government the question of condonation of delay ought to have been liberally approached by the learned Additional District Judge. Upon hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the impugned order, I find that in the first place the Payment of Wages Authority has made minute analysis of evidence adduced before it and secondly, order was passed by Payment of Wages Authority on 26.7.2001 against which the appeal was preferred by the State as late as the year 2008, which is after more than seven years from the date of order impugned. Keeping in view the amount of back wages and also the amount of compensation and the fact that 3 question of working of the respondent with the petitioner was the question of fact and that question having been decided against the petitioner more than eight years before, now I find no justification in remanding the matter to the first Court. Moreover, I do not find any case either on merit. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.43.