Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard Sri Sunil Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Miss Sumati Rani Gupta, learned counsel appearing for respondents-workmen.

2. The writ petition is directed against the order dated 28/29.3.2008 passed by respondent No. 3, Prescribed Authority under Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as “1948 Act”) holding that petitioner has paid less than the minimum wages to concerned workmen and, therefore, it had to pay a sum of Rs. 1,87,314/- to all the workmen-applicants who have filed Misc. Case No. 57 of 2007 alongwith compensation of the same amount and cost of Rs. 300/-.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner is a ‘hospital’ and, therefore, would not be covered by entry “private clinic and private medical shops” which has been ignored by Prescribed Authority. He further contended that out of 22 workmen only three were examined by petitioner and rest did not appear and, therefore, the petitioner was denied opportunity to cross-examine them. He further submitted that some of the workmen had given affidavits to petitioner that they were only part time e