JUDGMENT 1. - The matter comes up on the application for early hearing. 2. While hearing the learned counsel for the parties on this application for early hearing, it transpired that the present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 31.5.95 passed by the Prescribed Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, making direction under Section 5(3) of the Act. The present writ petition has been filed on 12.3.1997. 3. Since in view of Section 17, such direction is appealable within a period of 30 days, and the appeal lay to the District Judge, in that view of the matter, the petitioner had an adequate alternative legal remedy of appeal, an having not assailed the same, the writ jurisdiction could not be invoked by the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner thereupon tried to make out a case of infirmity in the impugned order by inviting attention of the Court to the provisions of Section 15(3) of the Act about the amount of compensation awarded being excessive. 5. Suffice it to say that even that ground could very well be raised in the appeal, if were to be filed under Section 17. 6. In view of what is found above, the writ petition itself is finality disposed of at this stage, and is hereby dismissed as above.Writ Petition dismissed. *******