JUDGMENT D.H. WAGHELA, J. 1. Having regard to the enquiry report dated 16.07.2012 of the Deputy Commissioner, Yadgiri District and the doubts and disputes about the workmen who are alleged to have been deprived of the due benefits, learned counsel for the petitioner did not press for any specific direction in the form of mandamus for payment of wages to particular persons who, according to the petitioner, had worked as migrant workers under the contractors and on the projects of the State Government in the Districts of Koppal and Yadgiri. It was however submitted by learned counsel Mr.V.S.Naik appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner -trade union is in a position to submit the list of workmen who had been employed in an illegal manner under the 4 contractors selected and appointed by the State Government and more particularly, under respondent Nos.3 and 6. He further submitted that the petitioner would be in a position to make specific claim in respect of certain migrant workmen who are still available in Mehboobnagar and the Union would also be in a position to establish their identity as the persons who worked directly or indirectly under respondent Nos.3 and 6. He therefore proposes to submit a detailed representation in respect of the specific claims of certain identified or identifiable workmen before respondent Nos.11 and 12 for the purpose of making monetary claim and complaint about violation of various relevant provisions of the labour laws including Inter-State Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1979, Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. 2. Learned counsel Mr.Subrahmanya appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 6 stated on instruction that the respondents will cooperate in the enquiry and exercise for identification of the workmen concerned, which may be undertaken by respondent Nos.11 and 12, as and when the 5 petitioner makes the proposed representation before them. He also submitted that respondent Nos.3 and 6 will provide the material and documents which may help respondent Nos.11 and 12 in identifying the persons who would have worked at the relevant time on the projects, as also the period for which they would have worked and the details of payments made by respondent Nos.3 and 6 shall also be furnished to respondent Nos.11 and 12. 3. 3. Learned AGA appearing for the State authorities including respondent Nos.11 and 12, who may be required to make necessary enquiry upon representation of the petitioner, submitted that if and when an appropriate representation is made by the petitioner with necessary broad details of the claims and claimants, respondent Nos.11 and 12 shall undertake necessary preliminary enquiry, after calling for all the available record and material from respondent Nos.3 and 6 and try to ascertain the amounts, if any, payable to any particular workmen by respondent Nos.3 and 6. Learned AGA also stated that in case of necessity, the Deputy Commissioners of Koppal and Raichur Districts shall make further enquiry and ascertain whether any provisions of the labour laws were violated by 6 respondent Nos.3 and 6 and any prosecution could be initiated against the aforesaid contractors, besides ordering payment of specific sum of money to the persons who are properly identified as the aggrieved workmen, after such enquiry as may be deemed proper. 4. Accordingly, the petitioner is permitted to make appropriate representation, after due authorisation from the workmen concerned and if and when such representation is made, it may be dealt with by respondent Nos.11 and 12, as aforesaid. The petitioner as well as the workmen concerned are also at liberty to approach the Labour Court for claiming the amount, if any, to which they may be entitled under any particular provision of law. Subject to these observations and directions, the petition is disposed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid.