( 1 ) COMMON question that arises to be addressed to by us in this judgment is, Whether Labour Court was right in entertaining claim of workman, while exercising powers under Section 33c (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, in absence of formal adjudication by competent court or authority when the claim was not admitted by the other side ?

( 2 ) ALL the Letters Patent Appeals are disposed of by this common judgment as they are arising out of the common judgment and order dated 9. 5. 2000 passed by the learned Single Judge of this court (Coram : H. K. Rathod, J.) dismissing all the writ petitions filed by the appellants-Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board (for short "the Board" ).

( 3 ) ALL the aforesaid writ petitions i. e. Special Civil Application Nos. 2327, 3116, 2327, 3116 of 1994, Special Civil Application Nos. 3946 to 3950 of 1985 and 3966 to 3969 of 1985, Special Civil Application Nos. 1945 to 1952 of 1987 are also disposed of by this common judgment as the same were referred to the Division Bench by learned Brother D. H. Waghela, J. by his common order dated 10. 10. 2000 in view of the pendency of the above appeals before this court arising out of the aforesaid common judgment and order dated 9. 5. 2000 passed by learned Brother H. K. Rathod, J. dismissing all the writ petitions filed by the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board against the order passed by the Labour Court, which was direct in conflict with the judgment and order dated 4. 12. 1996 passed by another learned Single Judge of this court (Coram : S. K. Keshote, J.) in Special Civil Application No. 3117 to 3119 of 1994 whereby it was held that direct writ petitions filed by the workmen without prior adjudication before the Labour Court were not maintainable.

( 4 ) LEARNED counsel Shri J. R. Nanavati appeared for Shri Munshaw for the appellant-Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board in all the writ petitions and also appeared in Jamnagar Municipal Corporation. Shri P. H. Pathak appeared for the respondent-workmen in all the Letters Patent Appeals and Shri N. R. Sahani for Shri Manoj Popat for respondent-workman in all the writ petitions.

( 5 ) AS such, all these matters were argued and heard together and are decided by this common judgment.

( 6 ) 43 workmen working on different posts like Diesel Operator, Electrical Operator, Electrical Operator, Attendant, Chowkidar, Diesel Operator, Electrical Operator, Line Man, Store Man, Store Chowkidar, Heavy Truck Driver, Pump Operator etc. with "the Board" straightaway approached Labour Court, Amreli in 1995 for recovery of over time wages from "the Board" by way of Separate Recovery application Nos. 866 to 908 of 1995, which are now given new Nos. 318 to 360 of 1998. The same were allowed by Labour Court, Amreli by its common judgment and award dated 26. 7. 1999.

( 7 ) THE aforesaid impugned common judgment and award dated 26. 7. 1999 passed by the Labour Court, Amreli was challenged by "the Board" before this court by way of separate writ petitions i. e. Special Civil Application Nos. 8826 to 8868 of 1999. The same were initially placed before learned Single Judge of this court (Coram : Ms. R. M. Doshit, J. ). While issuing notice on all these writ petitions and making it returnable on 17. 12. 1999 Her Lordship stayed the execution and operation of the impugned common judgment and award passed by the Labour Court in favour of the respondent-workmen. However, for some or the other reason the matters could not be heard on the returnable date and adjourned from time to time before different Honble Judges of this court.

( 8 ) WHEN all the writ petitions were placed before H. K. Rathod, J. on 9. 5. 2000 His Lordship was pleased to admit all the writ petitions by issuing rule on it and Shri P. H. Pathak, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-workmen waived notice of rule and on the facts and circumstances of the case all the writ petitions were taken up for final hearing by His Lordship on th