( 1 ) CHANDUBHAI Ishwerbhai koli and other petitioners have filed this petition praying for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or orders quashing and setting aside the order dated 8-1-2001 at Annexure E to respondents to continue the benefits under GR dated 4th july 1973 by continuing the order dated 28-12-1999 at Annexure D to the petition.

( 2 ) THE facts leading to the present petition are as under :2. 1. The petitioners have been working with the respondents as daily wagers. The Secretary to Government addressed a communication dated 5-11-1999 to the Superintending Engineer. Capital Project Circle. Gandhinagar stating that certain employees as per earlier Resolution dt. 4-7-1973. Accordingly said benefits were given. Accordingly the Superintending Engineer. Capital Project Circle. Gandhinagar by his office order No. 325 of 1999 dated 28-12-1999 decided to confer the benefit of work charged employees to the names of the persons mentioned in his order in view of the earlier Resolution dt. 4-7-1973. 2. 2. Thereafter the Government of gujarat in its Roads and Buildings department by its communication dated 8-1-2001 addressed to the Superintending engineer. Roads and Buildings, Capital project Circle. Gandhinagar has decided to take away the benefit given under the g. R. dated 5-11-1999 and he has been requested to take appropriate action accordingly. 2. 3. In view of the same the petitioners have filed this petition somewhere on 8-1-2001. When this mater came up for hearing before this court on 9-1-2000. this court issued notice to the respondents making it returnable on 29-1-2001 and status quo with regard to the petitioners service conditions was ordered to be maintained till 3-1-2001. 2. 3. A. Mr. Sompura learned advocate for the petitioner has invited my attention to the facts of the case. He invited my attention to the Resolution dated 4-7-1973 which is at Annexure-B to the petition on page-23. It provides that the persons who are working on the Nominal Muster Rolls may be converted into work charged employees. He has also invited my attention to the Resolution/settlement dated 1-10-1988 arrived at on 1-10-1988 copy of which is produced at Annexure-F to the petition on page-32. He has also stated that thereafter Government has also issued a Resolution dated 17-10-1988 based upon the said settlement. He has also invited my attention to Annexure-A to the petition where the names of the persons who are working since so many years with mentioned. He has also invited my attention to the letter dated 5-11-1999 addressed by the Under Secretary superintending Engineer, Roads and buildings, Ahmedabad and and superintending Engineer Capital Project, gandhinagar which states that the governments should follow the Resolution dated 4-7-1973 and give certain attention to the office Order No. 325 of 1999 dated 28-12-1999 passed by the Superintendent engineer, Capital Progect, Gandhinagar where also certain benefits as per resolution dated 4-7-1973 are to be given. It may be noted here that Government initially decided to confer benefit as per resolution dated 4-7-1973. However by the resolution dated 31-3-1989 there is also instruction that the work charged employees should not be considered and therefore the original communication dated 5-1-1999 is to be cancelled. 2. 3. B. The learned advocate for the petitioner has also referred to section 9a of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) which provides for notice of change. He submitted that when settlement is arrived at and if the settlement, Government must give notice of chance as per section 9-A of the Act. He also submitted that in this case the workmen are likely to be affected prejudicially and there is change conditions of service contemplated by the government and therefore requirement of section 9-A of the Act is required to be followed. He has also relied upon section 29 of the Act which provides of Penalty for b