IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10560 of 1992 1. KAPILDEO SAH 2. BIDHYA SAH BOTH S/SO OF LATE MANGAL SAH R/O VILLAGE BASAULI PS. BASANTPUR,DISTT- SIWAN--- PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIAHR 2. COMMISSIONER-CUM- SECRETRARY LABOUR DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR 3. THE FIRST ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (MINIMUM WAGES)-CUM- AUTHORITY MINIMUM WAGES, SARAN DIVISION, CHAPRA 4. THE LABOUR INFORCEMENT OFFICER, BASNATPUR,DISTT-SIWAN 5. DISTRICT LABOUR INSPECTOR (MINIMUM WAGES) SIWAN 6. THE LABOUR INSPECTOR-BHAGWANPUR HAT DISTT-SIWAN 7. NAWLAKH MANJHI S/O LATE LEELA MANJHI 8. INDRASAN MANJHI S/O NAWLAKH MANJHI, BOTH RESPONDENTS NOS 6 AND 7 ARE R/O VILLAGE BASAULI PS. –BASANTPUR DISTT- SIWAN----------------------- RESPONDENTS. ----------- For the Petitioners:- Mr.Udit Nr. Singh with Mrs. Poonam kumari, Advoctes. For the State: Mr.Debunjan Choudhary, JC to SC-III --------- 5 28.11.2008 The primary submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that vide order dated 23.12.1985 contained in annexure-6 the complaint made by the private respondents under the Minimum Wages Act was rejected by the authority. But despite the same before communication of the order dated 23.12.1985 yet another case with identical claim was lodged on 22.12.1985 and the concerned authority despite noticing this fact ignored the matter and passed the present order which was upheld even by the appellate authority which is annexure-1 to the writ application and is under challenge. Attention of the Court has been drawn to that part of the order where this fact has been taken note of. But there is no explanation for allowing such a novel procedure of entertaining second case when an order on the dispute is earlier on its way. The grievance of the petitioners is borne out from - 2 - the impugned order which goes to the root of the matter. In view of the above, let the order dated 14.9.1992 contained in annexure- 1 be quashed. This writ application is allowed. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)