IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 18144 of 1997 Between: M/s. Reliance Cellulose Products Ltd., rep. by its Executive Director, Sri A.K.Jhun-Junwala, Patancheru, Medak District, ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Industrial Tribunal-II, Chandra Vihar Building, Hyderabad. 2 RAMJI SINGH, (Dismissed for default as per court order Dt. 31/7/2000 against R2) C/o President, M/s. Nagarjuna Steels Limited Employees' Union, Patancheru, Medak District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an order or direction or a writ particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF CERTIORARI after calling for the records from the 1st Respondent and quash the Award passed by the records from the 1st Respondent and quash the Award passed by the 1st Respondent in I.D.No. 148/94 dated 10-10-96 Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.SRINIVASA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : ORDER : This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of certiorari to quash the award 10.10.1996 in I.D No.148 of 1994 passed by the Chairman, Industrial Tribunal, Hyderabad-II. 2. When this matter is taken up for hearing, the learned standing counsel for the petitioner Sri K.Srinivasa Murthy submitted that he is no more the standing counsel. Hence, this Court directed the office to verify as to whether anybody entered appearance on behalf of the petitioner. The office, on verification, has submitted that no Vakalat on behalf of the petitioner is filed. From the docket, it appears that this Writ Petition was dismissed by this Court in so far as respondent No.2/workman is concerned by an order dated 31.07.2000. As this Writ Petition is against an award, whereby the 1st respondent i.e., the Industrial Tribunal ordered reinstatement of the 2nd respondent/workman and the same was dismissed in so far as the 2nd respondent is concerned, this Court is of the view that this Writ Petition has become infructuous. 3. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Dated June 4, 2009 KSH