IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT APPEAL NO : 116 of 2001 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated ______ in WP NO : 15787 OF 1996 on the file of the High Court.) Between: ..... APPELLANT AND .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.V.T.M.PRASAD (S.C.FOR APSRTC) Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.K.JAYAPRAKASH RAO The Court made the following : HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND HON’BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.A.No.116 of 2001 ORDER: (per HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN) This writ appeal is preferred against the order in W.P.No.15787 of 1996 dated 25.7.2000 whereby the Learned Single Judge had directed the appellant herein to consider the case of the petitioner for the post of cleaner, if he was otherwise eligible. In W.P.No.15787 of 1996, the workman had questioned the action of the respondent in acting contrary to the award of the Labour Court-I, Hyderabad in I.D.No.262 of 1993 dated 20.11.1993 and, and in effect, had sought implementation of the said Award. Since the Award in I.D.No.262 of 1993 dated 20.11.1993 has itself been set aside in W.A.No.63 of 2001 dated 30.6.2008, consequently the order of the Learned Single Judge in W.P.No.15787 of 1996 dated 25.7.2000 must also be set aside. The writ appeal is allowed. However, in the circumstances, without costs. _____________________ T.MEENA KUMARI,J Date: 30-6-2008 ___________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J Asp/gs