JUDGMENT Sanjay Karol, A. C. J. - Petitioners approached this Court praying mainly for the following reliefs in both the petitions: " (i) Issue writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or direction directing the respondent State to implement all the mandatory provisions of the various Acts as mentioned in the body of the writ petition with further directions that the benefits arising out of these Acts may kindly be paid to the petitioners with interest @9% per annum. (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or direction directing the respondent State of taking immediate steps in initiating steps for the recovery of monthly wages of the petitioners, due and admissible w. e. f. March, 2016 till date from the respondent company. (iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or direction directing the respondent No. 3 to initiate prosecution against the respondent company, its officials, management for non-depositing Employers Share of EPF with the respondent No. 3 in terms of Employee Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. (iv) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or direction to respondent No. 2 to immediately initiate action against the its officials (labour inspector and officer Baddi) for their in action so far, as well launch prosecution against the respondent company for committing violation of various labour laws and indulging in illegal human practices within a time bound manner. (v) That the respondent state may kindly be directed to intervene and resolve the issues and the problem by implementing all statutory norms, in the interest of justice and fair play. (vi) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or direction to respondent state, Local Administration to immediately depute police force at the units of the respondent company at Baddi and prepare inventory of the plant and machinery, raw material, valuable assets and restrain the respondent company and its management of shifting its unit, material out of M/s Stesalit Private Ltd. Site Unit I to VII, Plot No. 25, 26, 35, 42, 43, 44, 114, 17, 1, DIC and HPSIDC, Industrial Area Baddi, Tehsil Baddi, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh till the petitioner''s wages etc. are not paid ion complete respect. " 2. Petitioners constitute three categories of employees :- (a) Workmen, (b) Ministerial staff (c) Managerial staff. 3. are not paid ion complete respect. " 2. Petitioners constitute three categories of employees :- (a) Workmen, (b) Ministerial staff (c) Managerial staff. 3. Insofar as petitioners/workmen in CWP No. 1661/2016, are concerned, we find that out of 128 petitioners/ workmen, 52 petitioners/workmen, i. e. Petitioners No. 30 (Vikrant Sharma), 38 (Sanjeev Kumar), 42 (Kuldeep Singh), 45 (Shambhu Nath Singh), 54 (Lekh Raj), 55 (Ravi Kumar), 59 (Jai Chand) 60 (Ram Gopal Gautam), 61 (Till Ram), 62 (Manish Kumar), 63 (Balwant Singh), 64 (Ranjan Kumar Singh), 66 (Balbir Singh), 67 (R. S. Sandhu), 68 (Vipin Kumar Supahiya), 69 (Raj Kumar Chauhan) 70, (Rakesh Kumar Chauhan), 71 (Sunil Kumar), 72 (Rajinder Kumar), 73 (Hari Ram), 74 (Gurmeet Singh), 75 (Suresh Kumar), 76 (Sanjeev Kumar Rana), 77 (Swaran Singh), 78 (Tej Narayan), 79 (Pritam Chand), 80 (Harinder Parsad), 81 (Gurnaam Singh), 83, (Munna Sharma), 84 (Suresh Sharma), 85 (Vishwakarma Sharma), 86 (Parveen Kukmar), 88, (Sanjeev Kumar) 90 (Himanshu Kharra) 91 (Mukesh Sharma), 92 (Rajinder Chandel) 93 (Bhajan Lal), 94 (Ramesh Kumar), 95 (Jayoti Prakash), 97 (Bittu Kumar) 98 (Rajbir Singh), 99 (Ashwani Kumar), 100 (Anu Kumar), 101 (Manoj Kumar Sharma), 102 (Uma Shankar Singh), 103 (Dhurender Singh), 104 (Ajay Kumar), 111 (Neeraj Kumar), 122 (Suraj Bhan), 123 (Dharam Pal-1), 125 (Sanjeev Kumar) and 127 (Rakesh Kumar Sharma) have either been paid their dues till 31st March, 2017 or such amount stands deposited in the Registry of this Court. 4. The amount in respect of applicants in CMP No. 7238 of 2017, who also are workmen up to 31st March, 2017, stands deposited in the Registry of this Court. 5. In CWP No. 162 of 2017, the amount in respect of petitioners No. 13 (Hari Har Dass), 17 (Puranbasi Yadav), 18 (Subhash Chandra Mal), 24, (Suresh Chand) and 25 (Triwhban Singh) has also been deposited in the Registry of this court up to 31st March, 2017, who also are workmen. 6. We direct that subject to the petitioners filing affidavits, in terms of order dated 4. 7. 2017, the undisputed amount so deposited in the Registry of this Court be released to each one of the petitioners/workmen, mentioned supra. Registry to take action within four weeks from today. 7. With the passing of the order, we find that the petitions qua these petitioners (workmen) have become infructuous. Hence, qua these petitioners, petitions are dismissed. 8. 7. 2017, the undisputed amount so deposited in the Registry of this Court be released to each one of the petitioners/workmen, mentioned supra. Registry to take action within four weeks from today. 7. With the passing of the order, we find that the petitions qua these petitioners (workmen) have become infructuous. Hence, qua these petitioners, petitions are dismissed. 8. We are not impressed with the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that workmen would be rendered remediless for we notice that petitions were filed only with regard to the amount due and admissible w. e. f. March, 2016 till the date of filing of the petition. [prayer (ii)]. 9. We also notice that some of the petitioners/workmen have already taken recourse to alternate legal remedies. If the remaining petitioners have not exhausted such remedies, such course is equally available to them. The issue with regard to their engagement for a particular period; duties which they have discharged; and amount paid, if any, or not, can easily be adjudicated in the proceedings, which the petitioners can initiate under the provisions of Employees Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, as also the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. 10. Insofar as remaining petitioners, who fall in categories (b) and (c) are concerned, we are of the considered view that they are also not remediless. They can take recourse to such remedies as are otherwise available to them in accordance with law, which are equally efficacious. 11. The provisions of the Employees Provident Funds Scheme can be invoked if there is default on the part of the respondent Company in complying with the same. 12. Significantly, petitions qua such petitioners are absolutely vague and unspecific with regard to any alleged statutory violations. 13. The question of engagement and entitlement, in the absence of any specific averment, cannot be allowed to be agitated in these petitions. 14. We are conscious of the fact that since June, 2016, we have been passing various orders from time to time, but then this was done keeping in view the interest of the petitioners/workmen, who had approached this Court, primarily for disbursement of their wages/salaries. We also notice that with the passage of time, some of the reliefs had otherwise become infructuous. 15. We also notice that with the passage of time, some of the reliefs had otherwise become infructuous. 15. The Units set-up within the territory of Himachal Pradesh stand closed since long and the company as we are informed, is passing through financial crises but that would not mean that the company is not bound to comply with the provisions of law. Provisions of The minimum Wages Act 1948, the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, Employee Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and Industrial Disputes Act, 1948 need to be implemented in letter and spirit. But then all this, in the absence of any specific violation, cannot be adjudicated in these petitions. 16. Accordingly, we dispose of these petitions with liberty to the petitioners to approach appropriate authorities under the concerned Statutes for the redressal of their grievances which stood raised in the present petitions. We are sure that with the proceedings being initiated by the petitioners, the appropriate authorities shall consider and decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law. 17. With the aforesaid observations, both the petitions stand disposed of alongwith pending applications, if any.