IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16550 of 2004 SHALIGRAM DUBEY SON OF SHEO HARSH DUBEY, OWNER OF PAL REST HOUSE, STATION ROAD, GAYA, P.S. GAYA KOTWALI, GAYA, DISTRICT- GAYA, BIHAR – PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER-CUM- COMPETENT AUTHORITY/OFFICER, UNDER MINIMUM WAGES ACT, 1948, DALMIANAGAR (ROHTAS) HAVING HIS CAMP OFFICE AT GAYA. 3. THE LABOUR ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, GAYA, DISTRICT- GAYA. 4. BIJAY CHOUDHARY, SON OF BANKIM CHOUDHARY, RESIDENT OF CHHOTAKI DELHI, P.S. DELHA (GAYA), TOWN AND DISTRICT-GAYA, BIHAR – RESPONDENTS. ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Basant Kumar Tripathy and Mr. Mahesh Prasad, Advocates. For the State : Kumar Ravesh, AC to GA X ------ 3/ 27-04-2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent- State. 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition, questioning the validity and legality of order dated 26.10.2004 (Annexure-1), passed in Minimum Wages Case No. 84 of 2003 by an authority prescribed under section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (in short “the Act”). Admittedly any claim filed under section 20(2) of the Act and final order having been passed in terms of Section 20(3) of the Act is appealable under section 20(6) of the Act (Bihar 2 Amendment). Apparently the petitioner has approached this Court without exhausting alternative remedy of appeal. The question regarding the disputed facts involved in the present proceeding is required to be conclusively resolved by the statutory authority. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner must exhaust his alternative remedy of appeal under the provisions of the Act. 3. If the petitioner files an appeal within a period of four weeks from today with a certified copy of the present order and if a petition for condonation of delay is filed, then the appellate authority shall take into consideration the fact that the present writ petition was filed on 24.12.2004 and has remained pending before this Court till date and, accordingly, he shall be obliged to consider the prayer of the petitioner for condonation of delay sympathetically and shall consider the matter on merit. Endeavour should be made by the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of six months from the date of filing of such appeal. However, before passing final order an opportunity of hearing should be given to the employee, who is respondent no.4 in the present proceeding, and all 3 other concerned persons/authority. 4. It is made clear that if no such appeal is preferred by the petitioner with a certified copy of the present order within the time prescribed by this Court, then it shall be construed that the writ petition has finally been rejected by this Court. 5. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. BTiwary/ (Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)