1. Respondent No. 10 claims to be an employee in the unit of petitioner. Claiming himself to be a workman, he filed an application before the Labour Court in terms of Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 claiming for computation of his wages payable under an employment agreement with petitioner. It may be noted that this agreement was neither arrived at in course of any conciliation proceedings nor is a settlement nor has it been notified or given to any authority. It is an alleged private agreement between the parties. Before the Labour Court, notices were issued to the petitioner who appeared and challenged the maintainability of such an application. While doing so, it specifically urged that the agreement was forged, invalid and did not bind the petitioner in any manner. It disputed the claims of respondent No. 10. The Labour Court noticed the said challenges and then held that application in terms of Section 33C(2) of the Act was not maintainable and that respondent No. 10 had chosen a wrong forum. This was so ordered on 7.11.2007 (Annexure-4). It may also be noted that petitioners claim related to five years wages that is from 1.4.1981 to 20.4.1984 with