JUDGMENT :

GAURANG KANTH, J

1. The present writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, against the (i) Recovery order dated 23.09.2004 (“the impugned order”) and (ii) notice dated 12.10.2004 (“the impugned notice”), both issued by Respondent no.2.

2. By virtue of the impugned order, Respondent No.2 concluded that the Petitioner had retrenched 55 workmen of Respondent No.4/Union in violation of Section 25N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as “I.D. Act”). Hence in view of the same, Respondent No.2 directed Respondent No.3 to recover from the Petitioner the earned wages accrued to these 55 workmen for the period from 14.04.2004 to 31.05.2004 as land revenue arrears.

3. Vide the impugned notice, Respondent no.2 directed the Petitioner to appear before him on 20.10.2004 for discussing about the nonpayment of balance wages of Rs.5,67,000/- to the 54 workers of Respondent No.4/Union for the period from 01.06.2004 to 31.08.2004. The allegation against the Petitioner was that they retrenched these workmen in violation of Section 25-N of the I.D. Act.

FACTS RELEVANT FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE MATTER

4. The present dispute originates fr