( 1 ) IN this group of Writ Petitions, common questions about the interpretation of the provisions of Sec. 33c (2) and resultant rights of the employees are involved. Therefore, upon request, they are heard simultaneously, and now, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

( 2 ) THE petitioners, Panchayats, are bodies duly constituted under the provisions of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993 and constituted in Panchmahal district of Gujarat State, whereas, respondent No. 1 in each petition is the workman or the casual labourer and respondent No. 2 is the Mamlatdar of panchmahal District, being Revenue Recovery Authority. The respondents, in these petitions, filed Recovery Applications under Sec. 33c (2) of the Industrial disputes Act, 1947 ("i. D. Act", for short) against the petitioner-authorities before the Labour Court, Godhra, Panchmahal District, being Recovery application Nos. 3 to 10 of 1995, raising the following pleas : (I) That they are working since 1973 on permanent basis and with honesty and integrity; (II) That they have continuously worked as workmen for more than 240 days continuously for 5 years; (III) That, they are, therefore, entitled to full benefits arising out of the government Resolutions, mainly, relying on the Government Resolution, dated 17-10-1988; and (IV) That they are not paid the benefits that are due and payable under the resolutions of the Government and the petitioner, Panchayat authorities, are giving them casual and temporary work, depriving them of their rights and monetary benefits, particularly, in view of the Government resolution dated 17-10-1988.

( 3 ) IN absence of any written objections and specific opposition before the labour Court, probably, the attention of the Labour Court was not drawn to the real interpretation of the provisions of Sec. 33c (2), which has been, time and again, done by this Court as well as, the Honble Apex Court. The Labour court directed the petitioner-authority to pay each petitioner the salary and other monetary benefits, including that of Leave and Medical Allowance, due and payable to the casual workers in terms of the provisions of the Government resolution dated 17-10-1988. Being aggrieved by the common order, the petitioner-Panchayat authorities, have come up before this Court by filing this group of petitions.

( 4 ) THE learned Advocates appearing for the parties have offered their submissions. They have also taken this Court through the relevant record, and particularly, the Government Resolution dated 17-10-1988 and also, the material and relevant provisions of the I. D. Act. It appears that the attention of the labour Court was not properly drawn to the correct and real interpretation of the provisions of Secs. 33c (1) and (2) of the I. D. Act in the light of the factual profile and the admitted facts.

( 5 ) SECTION 33c of the I. D. Act, 1947 reads as under :"sec. 33c Recovery of money due from an employer :- (1) Where any money is due to a workman from an employer under settlement or an award or under the provisions of Chapter VA or Chapter VB, the workman himself or any other person authorised by him in writing in this behalf, or in the case of the death of the workman, his assignee or heirs may, without prejudice to any other mode of recovery, make an application to the appropriate Government for the recovery of the money due to him, and if the appropriate Government is satisfied that any money is so due, it shall issue certificate for that amount to the Collector who shall proceed to recover the same in the same manner as an arrear of land revenue : provided that every such application shall be made within one year from the date on which the money became due to the workman from the employer : provided further that any such application may be entertained after the expiry of the said period of one year, if the appropriate Government is satisfied that the applicant had sufficient cause for not making the application withi