IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.120 of 2009 SHAMBHU NATH GUPTA son of late Mohan Lal Gupta, resident of Sorampur, P.S.Bikram, District Patna, at present residing at Gulab Bagh Market, opposite of Hathwa Market, in the House of Sri Binod Kumar Gupta, P.S. Pirbahore,District Patna … … Appellant Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary to the Government, Labour Resources Department, Government of Bihar Patna. 3. The Joint Secretary to the Government, Labour Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 4. The Joint Labour Commissioner, Labour Resources Department,Government of Bihar, Patna 5. The Assistant Labour Commissioner, Labour Resources Department,Government of Bihar, Shram Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 6. The Labour Superintendent, Patna, Labour Resources Department, Government of Bihar,Shram Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 7. The certificate Officer-cum-District Panchayat Raj Offier, Patna,Government of Bihar, Patna 8. The Presiding Offier, Labour Court, Muzaffarpur. 9. The District Officer-cum-District Certifidate Offier, Patna … … Respondent For the appellant: Mr. Pravin Kumar Gupta For the respondents Mr. Prahalad Kumar Bhagat, ----------- 2. 20.2.2009 Respondent No. 10, appellant, aggrieved by the order dated 18.12.2008 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 10371 of 2008 by the learned Single Judge allowing the writ application has preferred this appeal under 2 Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. Short facts giving rise to this appeal are that the appellant filed an application for computation of his wages under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The foundation of the aforesaid claim was a settlement between him and his employer Baijnath Prasad Gupta dated 1.4.1984. The learned Single Judge on consideration of the material came to the conclusion that the aforesaid settlement alleged to have been arrived at between the workman and the employer is a private settlement and the proceeding under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act was not permissible for computation of the money due on the basis of that settlement. Mr. Pravin Kumar Gupta, learned counsel, appears on behalf of the appellant and he is not in a position to demonstrate that the settlement said to have been arrived at between the employer and the workman was sent to an Officer authorized by the appropriate Government. In view of Section 2(P) of the Industrial Disputes Act, the 3 learned Single did not commit any error. We do not find any merit in this appeal which stands dismissed in limine. Kanth ( C.K.Prasad, A.C.J.) (Dharnidhar Jha, J.)