A. R. TIWARI, J. ( 1 ) THESE petitions, seven in number, are heard as connected matters and are being disposed of by this common order. ( 2 ) FACTS lie in a narrow compass. Petition wise facts filed the application under Section 33-C of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Labour Court, Khandwa which was registered as case No. 9/87 ID. Act. By order dated 29. 6. 1990 (Annexure-'p/6') it was decided that respondent No 2 is entitled to receive the sum of Rs. 12,543. 75 Ps. Direction was made accordingly to the petitioner. This petition is filed for quashment of Anaexure 'p/6'. Respondent No. 2 filed the return in oppugnation. (e) Misc. Petition No. 141 of 1992 : the respondent No. 2 held the post of a Driver. He filed the application under Section 33-C of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Labour Court, Khandwa which was registered as Case No. 11/87 I. D. Act By order dated 29. 6. 1990 (Annexure-'p/6') it was decided that respondent No. 2 is entitled to receive the sum of Rs. 12,543. 75 Ps. Direction was made accordingly to the petitioner. This petition is filed for quashment of Annexure- 'p/6'. Respondent No. 2 tiled the return in oppugnation. (f) Misc. Petition No. 142 of 1992 : the respondent No. 2 held the post of a Peon. He filed the application under Section 33-C- of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Labour Court, Khandwa which was registered as Case No. 97/87 I. D. Act. By order dated 29. 6. 1990 (Annexure-'p/6') it was decided that respondent No. 2 is entitled to receive the sum of Rs. 12,643. 75 Ps. Direction was made accordingly to the petitioner. This petition is filed for quashment of Annexure- 'p/6'. Respondent No. 2 filed the return in oppugnation. (g) Misc. Petition No. 143 of 1992: the respondent No. 2 held the post of a Peon. He filed the application under Section 33-C of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Labour Court, Khandwa which was registered as Case No. 10/87 I. D. Act. By order dated 29. 6. 1990 (Annexure-P/6') it be decided that respondent No. 3 is entitled to receive the sum of Rs. 12,643. 75 Ps. Direction was made accordingly to the petitioner. This petition is filed for quashment of Annexure- 'p/6'. Respondent No. 2 filed the return in oppugnation. By order dated 29. 6. 1990 (Annexure-P/6') it be decided that respondent No. 3 is entitled to receive the sum of Rs. 12,643. 75 Ps. Direction was made accordingly to the petitioner. This petition is filed for quashment of Annexure- 'p/6'. Respondent No. 2 filed the return in oppugnation. ( 3 ) I have heard Shri A. K. Sethi, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Shri B. K. Pradhan, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 in these petitions. ( 4 ) SHRI Sethi, learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Labour Court Khandwa had no jurisdiction to entertain application and pass the impugned orders. According to him respondent No. 2, if aggrieved, should have resorted to remedy under Section 55 (2) of the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act or in the alternative under payment of Wages Act: According to him the grievance was not entertainable under the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act. In support of his contention he has placed reliance on decision dated 4th October 1996 rendered by Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 3629 of 1996 Sagarmal v. Distt. Sahakari Kendriya Bank and another. ( 5 ) SHRI Pradhan, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 has disputed the aforesaid contention and has submitted that Labour Court, Khandwa did possess the jurisdiction and competence to decide the question of correct wages and the orders are without fault. ( 6 ) THE question of jurisdiction, on the basis of the provisions contained in M. P. Co-operative Societies Act, does not seem to have been raised before the Labour Court. Khandwa and as such Labour Court had no occasion to consider such objection and decide the same. The Counsel, however, submits that the aforesaid objection goes to the root of the matter. The Counsel of the parties are one on the point that as this question was not raised before the Labour Court, Khandwa, the matter may be remanded to the Labour Court, Khandwa for decision afresh. ( 7 ) IN the circumstances I do not go into the merits of the matter and simply quash the aforesaid orders impugned in these writ petitions and remand the matter to Labour Court, Khandwa with direction to revive the applications under their original numbers and to decide the same, after reasonable opportunity of hearing to both the sides, in conformity with law. The petitioners shall be at liberty to raise all questions, including the question about jurisdiction, before the Labour Court and respondent No. 2 shall be at liberty to contest the same. ( 8 ) THE petitioner are thus allowed in part in terms indicated above, but without any orders as to costs. The security cost, if deposited, be refunded to the petitioners in each case, after due verification. ( 9 ) PARTIES shall appear before the Labour Court, Khandwa on 4th August, 1997 to take further orders in the matter. As the matter is old, Labour Court, Khandwa is directed to make an endeavour to decide the applications afresh within period of Four Months from the date fixed for first appearance by this order. ( 10 ) RETAIN this order in the record of Misc. Petition No. 116 of 1992 and place its copy each in the records of other connected Misc. Petitions, as particularised above, for ready reference. Petition allowed. .