JUDGMENT : Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order of the 1st respondent in G.O.Ms.No.423 Labour and Employment Department dated 31.07.2017 and the order in Ref.No.C/4616/2016 dt.10.03.2017 passed by the 3rd respondent and the Order Letter No.A1/6790/2014 dated 28.06.2017 passed by 2nd respondent. Prayer amended as per order dated 04.10.2019 in W.M.P.No.24517/2018 in W.P.No.27850 of 2017 1. The order issued by the 1st respondent in G.O.Ms.No.423, Labour and Employment dated 31.07.2017 is sought to be quashed in the present writ petition. 2. A perusal of the impugned order issued in G.O.D.No.423, the same is the Recovery Certificate issued under Section 33(C)(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act by the 1st respondent. The Government issued an order to recover Rs.8,11,52,000/-(Rupees Eight Crore Eleven Lakhs Fifty Two Thousand only) from the writ petitioner namely M/s.Mahavir Plantations Private Limited and settle the amount to the workmen, who served in the petitioner Plantations. 3. Challenging the said order, the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner Plantation made a submission that proper scrutinizations were not done by the Government in calculating and disbursing the wages and other benefits to the workmen, who worked in the petitioner Plantation. The 1st respondent Government has not considered the reply submitted by the writ petitioner on 30.01.2017 and no opportunity was provided before issuing the impugned Recovery Certificate. When the writ petitioner has requested for a personal hearing, the same was not provided and therefore, the impugned order is liable to be scrapped. 4. It is further contended that one of the Status Report filed before the Hon’ble High Court, the claims under Section 33(C)(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act has involved themselves in illegal Plucking of Tea leaves till the year 2006 and appropriate the same amounts towards the dues. Thus, the payment of arrears of wages and salary to these workmen does not arise at all. These facts were explained in the reply submitted by the writ petitioners on 30.01.2017. However, the said reply was totally disregarded by the 1st respondent, while passing the impugned order. Thus, the payment of arrears of wages and salary to these workmen does not arise at all. These facts were explained in the reply submitted by the writ petitioners on 30.01.2017. However, the said reply was totally disregarded by the 1st respondent, while passing the impugned order. The petitioner states that the claim of the workmen are barred by limitation under Section 33(C)(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act and there was no satisfactory explanation has been given by the workmen and therefore, no applications could be entertained by the 1st respondent for issuing the impugned order of Recover Certificate. 5. At the outset, it is contended that the workmen has no right to claim any salary or arrears from the writ petitioner Plantation and the belated filing of the application under Section 33(C)(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act cannot be entertained by the 1st respondent and on these grounds, the writ petition is to be considered. 6. The learned Additional Advocate General disputed the contentions raised on behalf of the writ petitioners by stating that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has decided the issue. The payment was already made in favour of the workmen pursuant to the order passed in the impugned order is in consonance with the orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. The issues were already adjudicated by the Hon’ble Division Bench and by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. In Contempt Petition No.16 of 2012 in W.P.(C).No.365 of 2006, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India passed an order on the ground that the workmen, who served more than 20 years, have not been paid their wages and their condition was pitiable and some of them have resorted to commit suicide. In some cases, proceedings have been initiated by the workmen and in some cases by the Government for the recovery of the dues. The amounts have been locked the Litigation and without any relief to the workers. Having regard to these circumstances, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India considered it appropriate to hear the State Governments on the question of interim relief that may be granted to the workmen. The amounts have been locked the Litigation and without any relief to the workers. Having regard to these circumstances, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India considered it appropriate to hear the State Governments on the question of interim relief that may be granted to the workmen. The issues in relation to various States were adjudicated in the above case by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and as far as the State of Tamil Nadu is concerned, the following orders were passed: IN RE: STATE OF TAMIL NADU According to the Central Government in the State of Tamil Nadu, an amount of 17 Crores is outstanding and payable to the workmen as dues for the work rendered by them. Shri V. Giri, learned counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu states that as on date, the liability is to the extent of about Rs. 9.5 crores. Undoubtedly, the primary liability is of the employers. However, having regard to the circumstances of this case which we have adverted to earlier we consider it appropriate to pass the following order: (i) The State Government would pay the necessary funds of Rs. 9.5 Crores to the employees upon verification within 60 days . (ii) Notices shall be issued to the workers to present their claims and only upon verification the said amounts shall be disbursed to them. (iii) In case the workers have died, the amounts shall be disbursed to the legal representatives upon verification of their status. (iv) Upon verification of their identities and claims they shall make payment in chronological order, i.e., those who have retired earlier shall be paid before those who have retired later. (v) The process of verification and identification shall be commenced immediately. (vi) The Government shall be entitled to recover those amount from all those employers whose primary duty was to pay the wages, as a revenue demand or any other efficacious manner. (v) The process of verification and identification shall be commenced immediately. (vi) The Government shall be entitled to recover those amount from all those employers whose primary duty was to pay the wages, as a revenue demand or any other efficacious manner. We are informed by the State of Tamil Nadu that primary liability is of the employer list of which is as follows: Address of the Tea Gardens S.No. Name of the Tea Estate & Address Name of the Company & Address 1 High Forest Estate Post, Valparai, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, Pincode – 642127 Mahavir Plantations Pvt. Ltd., 24/1511, Indira Gandhi Road Kochi – 682 003 2 Liddelsdale & Prospect Liddlellsdale Estate Naduvattam Post, Ooty Taluk, The Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu – 643 224 Mahavir Plantations Pvt. Ltd., 24/1511, Indira Gandhi Road Kochi – 682 003 3 Manjushree, New Hope & Glenvans New Hope Estate, New Hope Post, Gudalur Taluk, The Nilgiris Tamil Nadu – 643 226 Manjushree Plantations Limited, 7E Neelamber Building, 28B, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata – 700017 4 Seaforth Estate, Seaforth Post, Gudalur Taluk, the Nilgiris Tamil Nadu – 643 228 Mahavir Plantations Pvt. Ltd., 24/1511, Indira Gandhi Road Kochi – 682 003 We accordingly consider it appropriate to direct the State of Tamil Nadu to notify the owners of those Tea gardens about these proceedings before us. Accordingly issue notice to those above Tea gardens through companies/management returnable in two weeks.” 7. It is pertinent to note that Shri.V.Giri, learned counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu made a submission that as on date, the liability is to the extent of about Rs.9.5 crores. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, considering the plight of the poor workmen and considering the facts and circumstances, hear the State and issued directions for interim payment of Rs.9.5 crores. The employees upon verification within 60 days. In the very same order, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India clearly states that “the Government shall be entitled to recover those amount from all these employers whose primary duty was to pay the wages, as a revenue demand or any other efficacious manner.” 8. Thus, the impugned order has been issued in G.O.D.No.423 dated 31.07.2017, in order to recover the interim amount already disbursed by the Government of Tamil Nadu in favour of the workmen, who served in the writ petitioner Plantation. 9. Thus, the impugned order has been issued in G.O.D.No.423 dated 31.07.2017, in order to recover the interim amount already disbursed by the Government of Tamil Nadu in favour of the workmen, who served in the writ petitioner Plantation. 9. The payment already made to the workmen of the writ petitioner Plantation is only an interim relief and rest of the issues are to be adjudicated in the manner known to law. 10. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the Government of Tamil Nadu filed a Status Report, stating that M/s.Mahavir Plantation (P) Ltd., is a company registered under the Companies Act of 1956 and Prospect, Lidlesdale, Seaforth and High Forest are the 4 estates come under the management of M/s.Mahavir Plantation (P) Ltd., Among them, the Prospect, Liddlesdale and Seaforth are situated in Nilgiris district, whereas the High Forest estate is situated in Valparai, Coimbatore District. 11. During the year 1999, due to financial crisis, the Management of M/s.Mahavir Plantation (P) Ltd., Nilgiris did not pay wages and other statutory benefits like gratuity, bonus, contribution to Provident Fund etc., to the workers, which resulted in continuous unrest in these estates. Meanwhile, the workers formed a group and indulged in the plucking tea leaves by themselves in the estate without consent of the management and privately sold them and out of the proceeds, they have appropriated their wages. 12. The Labour Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, intervened and talks were held at various levels. The management and their workmen represented by all trade unions entered into a bilateral settlement on 23.05.2001. As per this settlement, the workers have agreed to stop the illegal plucking and the Management agreed to disburse the wages for the months of January and February, 2001 and other dues before August 2001. The Management did not fulfill their commitment. Consequently, there was unrest and the Management declared lock-out on 31.12.2001. 13. On 13.05.2002, the Management and their workers represented by their trade unions entered into a bipartite settlement, wherein the Management agreed to pay an advance of Rs.1,500/- to each of the workers and also agreed to pay the daily wages of Rs.70/- Plus Rs.2/-(attendance bonus) regularly, the workers agreed to work peacefully. The lock-out was lifted on 15.05.2002. 14. 13. On 13.05.2002, the Management and their workers represented by their trade unions entered into a bipartite settlement, wherein the Management agreed to pay an advance of Rs.1,500/- to each of the workers and also agreed to pay the daily wages of Rs.70/- Plus Rs.2/-(attendance bonus) regularly, the workers agreed to work peacefully. The lock-out was lifted on 15.05.2002. 14. One faction of workers numbering about 500 headed by an ex-employee Thiru.P.Mani did not agree to the settlement dated 13.05.2002 and started plucking the green leaves without the consent of the Management and sold them privately and the proceeds were appropriated by them for the wages due to the workers. These activities continued till May, 2006. 15. Thiru.P.Mani has alleged that the workers of Mahavir Plantation (P) Ltd., Nilgiris have not been settled their legal dues by the writ petitioner. 16. Thiru.P.Mani, an ex-employee filed a case in W.P.No.3967 of 2011 before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras, seeking direction to recover the amount due to the workmen towards wages, provident fund, gratuity, bonus and other benefits. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras, after hearing the parties to the case in order dated 01.08.2016 directed as follows: “It is his submission that the Joint Commissioner of Labour is, in fact, required to look into that aspect and issue certificates of dues for proceeding under Section 33-C (1) of the said Act, in view of the earlier writ proceedings. It is thus submitted that the impugned order cannot be sustained and the matter would have to be looked into afresh. We may however note that qua Wages, proceedings under Section 33-C(1) are stated to be pending. We find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner in terms of the conspectus aforesaid and thus, we set aside the impugned order dated 02.07.2010 with a direction to pass a fresh order, keeping in mind the aforesaid discussion and the earlier order passed by the Division Bench. The needful be done within a period of four months of the receipt of the order in accordance with law. The writ petition stands allowed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.” 17. The needful be done within a period of four months of the receipt of the order in accordance with law. The writ petition stands allowed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.” 17. The Division Bench in order dated 17.09.2009 passed in W.P.No.1362 of 2007 and a batch of writ petitions ordered as follows: “by directing the competent authority to proceed in accordance with law for recovery of the dues of the workmen, particularly, with regard to the Provident Fund, Gratuity, arrears of wages, bonus, and other dues, if any, to which one or other employee is entitled to. If the due amounts are not paid within the time by the Company, it will be open for the competent authority to auction-sale the land(s), for which they have already taken steps earlier, but could not be done because of interim order of injunction, which has now been vacated, as noted above. In view of our findings as recorded above, the other pending miscellaneous petitions, including the impleading petition, are closed. No costs.” 18. Pursuant to the order dated 01.08.2016 of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the above Writ Petition No.3967 of 2011, the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Coimbatore on getting a fresh representation dated 20.12.2016 from Thiru.P.Mani, had sent proposal for recovery of dues towards arrears of wages, bonus, and other dues and the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Coimbatore in his letter No.C/4616/2016 dt.23.12.2016 has called for remarks from the writ petitioner on the representation dated 20.12.2016 of Thiru.P.mani and the writ petitioner in letter dated 30.01.2017 submitted a reply. 19. On considering the representation of the petitioner Thiru.P.Mani, the Government of Tamil Nadu in Labour and Employment has issued an order under Section 33(C)(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, vide G.O.(D).No.423 Labour and Employment (D2) Department, dated 31.07.2017, directing the District Collector, Nilgiris to recover an amount of Rs.8,11,52,000/-. 20. Challenging the above said order of the Government of Tamil Nadu, the Management of M/s.Mahavir Plantation (P) Ltd., has filed this case in W.P.No.27850 of 2017 before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras, while ordering notice, directed to maintain status quo on 01.11.2017 in the above said case. 21. 20. Challenging the above said order of the Government of Tamil Nadu, the Management of M/s.Mahavir Plantation (P) Ltd., has filed this case in W.P.No.27850 of 2017 before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras, while ordering notice, directed to maintain status quo on 01.11.2017 in the above said case. 21. A Non-Governmental Organization, International Union of Food Agriculture and others filed a Public Interest Litigation Petition, Writ Petition(Civil) No.365 of 2006, and the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India was pleased to pass order dated 06.08.2010 in W.P.(C). No.365 of 2006, directing the Central Government to carry out their statutory duties under the provisions of the Tea Act, 1953 (Act No.29 of 1953), particularly in terms of Section 16B, 16C, 16D, 16E within a period of 6 months. 22. The order dated 06.08.2010 passed in W.P.(C).No.365 of 2006 was not complied within the time limit, a Contempt Petition(C)16 of 2012 in W.P.(C).No.365/2006 was filed by International Union of Food Agricultural and Others before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. This Contempt Petition(C) 16 of 2012 has been filed against the Union of India, State of Assam, West Bengal, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, which is still pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. 23. In respect of Tamil Nadu, the Tea Plantation estates viz., High Forest, Liddelsdale, Prospect, Manjushree, Seaforth are having dues in respect of PF, Gratuity, wages and bonus etc., to the workers. The Government of India in Ministry of Labour and Employment in letter dated 18.07.2017 requested the State of Tamil Nadu to inform the action taken for recovery of dues of the workers. 24. The Government of India in Gazette Notification dated 08.08.2017, appointed a committee to investigate into the affairs of the Tea garden such as High Forest, Prospect, Liddelsdale, Seaforth etc. The Committee members visited the Tea estates in the District of Nilgiris and Coimbatore on 22.08.2017, 23.08.2017 and 25.08.2017 and a report on the dues of the workers submitted to the Government of India and also to the Tea Board. 25. The Committee members visited the Tea estates in the District of Nilgiris and Coimbatore on 22.08.2017, 23.08.2017 and 25.08.2017 and a report on the dues of the workers submitted to the Government of India and also to the Tea Board. 25. In respect of the claims filed by the workers, it is submitted that the authorities under various statutes like Payment of Gratuity, Payment of Wages Act, Minimum Wages Act, Employees Compensation and Industrial Disputes Act etc., have adjudicated the amount as per the claims filed by the aggrieved workmen and as the amount has not been settled by the management concerned and being unsettled over a long period, the authorities have taken action under Revenue Recovery Act wherever it applies. 26. As directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in order dt.21.08.2017, in Contempt Petition(C) No.16 of 2012, the Government of Tamil Nadu has filed a status report on 16.01.2018 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and it is submitted that as per status report filed an amount of Rs.9.31 crores are pending due towards wages Gratuity, Bonus and Compensation etc., and out of Rs.9.31 crores, the petitioner is liable to pay an amount of Rs.9.30 crores. 27. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in order dated 04.04.2018 had directed the States of Assam, West Bengal, Kerala and Tamil Nadu to pay the amount due to the workers within 60 days on receipt of the order under intimation to the Management of Tea Estates concerned. Further, it is stated that in order dated 04.04.2018, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has directed the State of Tamil Nadu to settle an amount of Rs.9.5 crores to the workers of High Forest, Prospect, Liddelsdale, Seaforth which belong to the Management of M/s.Mahavir Plantation (P) Ltd., and another Tea Estate, Manjushree Plantations and also permitted the State Government to recover the said amount from the employers whose primary duty was to pay the wages and other dues, as a revenue demand or any other efficacious manner. 28. As directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in order dt.04.04.2018, the Government of Tamil Nadu has taken the following actions: (a) It is submitted that as directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, an amount of Rs.9.25 crores was sanctioned vide G.O.No.424, Labour and Employment Department, dated 10.07.2018 by the Government of Tamil Nadu. 28. As directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in order dt.04.04.2018, the Government of Tamil Nadu has taken the following actions: (a) It is submitted that as directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, an amount of Rs.9.25 crores was sanctioned vide G.O.No.424, Labour and Employment Department, dated 10.07.2018 by the Government of Tamil Nadu. (b) It is submitted that a committee was constituted to implement the order dated 04.04.2018 in Contempt Petition No.16 of 2012 by the Commissioner of Labour, Chennai vide Proceedings No.A1/30343/2017 dated 18.07.2018 consisting of the officers of Labour Department for identification, receiving the claims, verification and disbursement of amount to the workers of tea estates. (c) It is submitted that camps were conducted on 06.08.2018, 07.08.2018, 10.08.2018, 14.08.2018 and 05.09.2018 at Naduvattam on 11.08.2018 and 21.08.2018 at Seaforth, by the members of the committee and on 06.09.2018 and 12.09.2018, claim applications were received at the office of the Assistant Commissioner of Labour (Plantation), Gudalur and at the time of receiving claim applications, the contents of the application were verified and certified by the Village Administrative Officer, Revenue Inspector and the workers representatives and on scrutinizing the claim applications, the Committee members recommended for disbursement of amount to the workers concerned. (d.) Till date, an amount of Rs.8,04,71,624.24/- has been settled to 1053 workers as stated below: (di) DETAILS OF AMOUNT DISBURSED Sl.No Name of the Estate Name of the Act No. of Workers / legal heirs to whom amount disbursed Amount disbursed (Rs.) 1 High Forest Estate, Valparai Gratuity Act 28 16,59,482/- 2 Prospect and Liddlesdale Estate, Nilgiris Gratuity Act 121 52,66,121/- 3 High Forest Estate, Valparai Workmen Compensation Act 2 88,848/- 4 Prospect and Liddlesdale Estate, Nilgiris Industrial Disputes Act 569 7,28,32,000/- 5 Prospect, Liddlesdale and Seaforth Estate, Nilgiris Minimum Wages Act 333 6,25,173.24/- Total 1053 8,04,71,624.24 (e) The Joint Commissioner of Labour, Coonoor in his letter dt.04.06.2019 has informed the District Collector, Nilgiris, about the disbursement of amount to the workers of Prospect, Liddlesdale and Seaforth Estates in order to enable to recover the amount from the Management. (f) Action is being taken to settle the amount, the remaining workers also. (f) Action is being taken to settle the amount, the remaining workers also. It is submitted that publicity was given about camps in newspaper and also displayed on notice board of the office of the Assistant Commissioner of Labour(Plantation), Gudalur, and special camps were conducted on 10.07.2019, 11.07.2019, 12.07.2019 and 19.07.2019 and applications were received and out of the applications received, 66 applications are in full shape and ready for disbursement. 29. The Management of M/s.Mahavir Plantation (P) Ltd., has filed an interlocutory application before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Contempt Petition(C) No.16/2012 in W.P.(C).No.365/2006, which is still pending. It is submitted that a status report has been filed on behalf of Government of Tami Nadu on 14.08.2019 on the action taken for disbursement of amount. 30. Even, the Writ Petitioner company filed the Contempt Petition No.1745/2018 for the willful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 1.11.2017 passed in W.M.P.No.29877 of 2017 in W.P.No.27850 of 2017. In the said Contempt Petition, this Court passed an order on 11.06.2019, stating that the Contempt Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. 31. On behalf of the Government, it was brought to the Notice of the Hon’ble Court, “that the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India by order dated 04.04.2018 in Contempt Petition (C).No.16 of 2012 in Writ Petition ©.No.365 of 2006 has directed the Government of Tamil Nadu to disburse Rs.9.5 crores to the employees upon verification within 60 days with further conditions that notices shall be issued to the workers to present their claims and only upon verification the said amounts shall be disbursed to them. In case the workers have died, the amounts shall be disbursed to the legal representatives upon verification of their status. Upon verification of their identities and claims, they shall make payment in chronological order i.e., those who have retired earlier shall be paid before those who have retired later; that the process of verification and identification shall be commenced immediately. The Government also shall be entitled to recover those amounts from all those employers whose primary duty was to pay the wages, as a revenue demand or any other efficacious manner. Pursuant to the said directions, she stated that, after identifying the beneficiaries, a sum of Rs.8,04,71,624.24 has been disbursed. The Government also shall be entitled to recover those amounts from all those employers whose primary duty was to pay the wages, as a revenue demand or any other efficacious manner. Pursuant to the said directions, she stated that, after identifying the beneficiaries, a sum of Rs.8,04,71,624.24 has been disbursed. With regard to the balance amount of Rs.1 crore and odd, she stated that steps are being taken and the said amount would be disbursed, as per the direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, shortly. It is at this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the contempt petition. Accordingly, granting permission to the learned counsel for the petitioner for withdrawal, the Contempt Petition No.1745 of 2018 is dismissed as withdrawn.” 32. Further, the contention of the Writ Petitioner that no opportunity was given to the Company before passing the order in G.O.(D).No.423, dated:31.07.2017 of the Labour and Employment Department dated 31.07.2017 is not correct and denied. 33. In respect of the grounds raised by the petitioner that no opportunity was given, the learned Additional Advocate General denied the same by stating that the Government has called for remarks from the petitioner company and thereafter, the impugned order has been passed. Thus, the petitioner had been given due opportunity to explain their stand and therefore, the writ petitioner company was having full knowledge of all these issues and wantonly making the false statements in this writ petition. 34. The petitioner company is having vast area of Tea Estate land and Tea factories and other buildings and the petitioner is liable to pay the amount paid by the Government along with interest. Now, the petitioner is having sufficient means to discharge his liabilities, but wantonly to drag the matter even after the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. 35. As a labour welfare measure, the Government has disbursed the amount due to the workers on behalf of the petitioner Management and the amount paid by the Government is the public money. Therefore, it is submitted that the Government is entitled to recover the said amount along with interest. 36. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the present writ petition on hand, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Government has already disbursed the interim amount of Rs.8,04,71,624.24/- and the said amount had been settled in favour of 1053 workers. 36. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the present writ petition on hand, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Government has already disbursed the interim amount of Rs.8,04,71,624.24/- and the said amount had been settled in favour of 1053 workers. The State fund had been utilized for the purpose of settling the salary and other benefits to the workers of the petitioner Plantation. The State fund, which is the tax payers’ money were settled pursuant to the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in order to mitigate the injustice caused to the workers, who served in the Tea Plantations. On account of the fact that the families of these workmen were starving, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has taken an extraordinary measure by directing the State Government to settle the amount and recover the said amount from the respective companies. The writ petitioner is having vast extent of lands, which is more valuable. Thus the taxpayers’ money, cannot be appropriated by the writ petitioner company. The interim settlement was made pursuant to the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, considering the plight of the poor workmen and therefore, the said amount already settled by the Government of Tamil Nadu must be recovered from the writ petitioner Plantation. 37. In respect of the other disputes, regarding the entitlement or otherwise of the workmen, it is left open to the writ petitioner company to adjudicate the same in the manner known to law. Contrarily, the writ petitioner company cannot raise all those points on merits in the present writ petition, wherein the Government order of recovery is under challenge. Admittedly, a huge amount of Rs.8,04,71,624.24/- had already been settled in favour of the workers served in the writ petitioner Plantation. Under these circumstances, the writ petitioner company is liable to pay the said amount and the Government is also entitled to recover the same without causing any undue delay. Such recovery of State funds are to be done on war footing basis. In the event of allowing any prolongation in this matter, the same would result in an unlawful enrichment on the part of the writ petitioner Plantation. Such recovery of State funds are to be done on war footing basis. In the event of allowing any prolongation in this matter, the same would result in an unlawful enrichment on the part of the writ petitioner Plantation. Thus, the Government cannot delay the recovery as the taxpayers’ money had already been settled in favour of the Tea Plantation employees pursuant to the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India as an interim measure. 38. This being the factum of the case, the writ petitioner company in the present writ petition, cannot adjudicate all the merits and the demerits of the claims of the workmen against the company and other issues raised. All these issues can be adjudicated before the competent Forum in the manner known to law and as far as the impugned order of recover is concerned, the Government had already settled the amount in favour of the workmen pursuant to the orders of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and therefore, the petitioner has to pay the same immediately and in the event of failure, the Government is entitled to recover without causing any delay. 39. Under these circumstances, the writ petitioner has not established any acceptable ground for the purpose of interfering with the order impugned. Consequently, the impugned orders passed by the respondents are confirmed and the writ petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.