' This judgment will dispose of Writ Petition No, 1316/82 and writ petition No, 1-317/82.
2. The Authority under the Payment of Wages Act has accepted the application of the workmen and has directed the respondents to make the payments. The record of writ petition No, 1316 of 1982 was examined with the help of the learned counsel. The statement of the applicant before the Authority was recorded on 27th September, 1981 and the right of cross-examination was reserved.
On 18th January, 1982 only Kafai Ullah one of the applicants was cross-examined. Nazir Ahmad another one of the applicants was also present. The record shows that his cross-examination was opened but with the submission of a document no question were asked from him. None of the other applicants were cross-examined. The learned counsel for the respondents argues that even though there is no specific direction to the effect that the cross-examination of the remaining applicants had been given up it should be assumed to have given up in the circumstances of the case. I am afraid, I do not find myself in agreement with the learned counsel for the respondents.
Cross-examination is an important right and the petitioners cannot be denied that right merely by deduction. It shall, therefore, be necessary to remand the case to the Authority for fresh decision after giving opportunity to the petitioners cross-examine the applicants before the .Authority.
3. The record of Writ Petition No, 1317 does indicate that the cross-examination took place. But since the judgment in that case is based on the judgment in the case under examination in Writ Petition No, 1316/82 that will also be defective. The two writ petitions are, therefore, allowed and the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act is directed to decide both the matters afresh in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the Authority on 1st December, 1984. There shall be, however, no order as to costs.