Shishir Kumar, J. - (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties. The present writ petition has been filed against an order dated 29.7.2002 by which the Labour Commissioner has decided that as the rights of the employer has been disputed regarding receipt of any amount, therefore, it can only be decided by the Labour Court by raising an industrial dispute. It appears that an order was passed in favour of the petitioner adjudicating their rights to be entitled for certain amounts in the year 1997. The respondents employees filed a writ petition before this Court as Writ petition No. 27509 of 1999. The said writ petition was finally disposed of vide its order dated 22.2.2002 with the following directions: "In these circumstances them matter has to be considered afresh by the Deputy Labour Commissioner in the light of the observations made above. The petition is allowed and the citation dated 23.6.1999 and letter dated 25.5.1999 of the Deputy Labour Commissioner are quashed. The Deputy Labour Commissioner shall after hearing the parties take a decision in the matter preferably within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is submitted before him by either of the parties." In pursuance of the directions issued by this Court now the Assistant Labour Commissioner has decided that on 11.2.1998, there was no Union and the compromise arrived and registered appears to be valid. Further a finding ahas been recored that as regards the closure of the Organisation, the matter has already been referred for industrial dispute on 27.1.1999 and the rights of the parties have to be adjudicated in the said proceeding. Further a finding has been recorded that the dispute like such, if it is disputed by the employer, cannot be adjudicated in such proceeding. It can only be decided by raising a dispute under Section 4-K on the Industrial Disputes Act to be referred by the State Government to the Industrial Tribunal. The dispute between the parties is still pending for consideration. The Apex Court in Modi Industries Ltd. Vs. State of U.P and others reported in 1993 FLR Page 1062 has held that regarding dispute of payment of wages, if there is a dispute regarding payment and quantum of amount, that cannot be decided in such proceeding. A dispute has to be raised for the said purpose for adjudication. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am also of the opinion that the Deputy Labour Commissioner-respondent has not committed any illegality in rejecting the claim of the petitioner as the same has been disputed by the respondent. Further a finding has been recored that the matter is still pending before the Industrial Court to be adjudicated, therefore, there will be no fruitful purpose for the same. The writ petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. No order is passed as to costs. It is however, directed that the Labour Court will decide the matter expeditiously, if possible, within a period of six months.;