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 MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 4158 of 2003 Between: 1 P.S.Patrudu, S/o.P.P.Patrdu, D No.27-13/1/3, Near Police Stadium, Behind Jain Temple, Visakhapatnam 530 002. 2 S.Nageshwar Rao, S/o.Sri Late Gowresu, D No.4/84, Police Station Down, Gopalapatnam, Visakhapatnam 530 027. 3 Ch.Prasad Rao, S/o.Sri Late Lakshmayya Patrudu, D.No. 14-102, Naidu Thota, Vepagunta, Visakhapatnam. 4 T.Nageshwara Rao, S/o. Late Ramulu, Flat No.3, AR Towers, Narasimhanagar, Visakhapatnam. 5 K.Venkateshwar Rao, S/o. Late Sri Abbai, D.No. 6-166, Priya Garden, Adivivaram,Simhachalam, Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Visakhapatnam Port Trust, Rep.by its Chairman Visakhapatnam. 2 The Industrial Disputes cum Labour Court, Rep.by its Presiding Officer Visakhapatnam. .....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 direction or writ particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari after calling for records in I.T.I.D.No. 3 of 1993 dated 12-4-1996, modify the award passed by the Hon'ble Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court ,Visakhapatnam,by declaring that the revised pay fixation done by the Port Trust in respect of the petitioners is erroneous and consequently direct that the petitioners are entitled to refixation of pay in terms of FR 22(1) (a) (I) on promotion from Junior Clerk to Time keeper post with all consequential monetory benefits and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondent : GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : ORDER : This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of certiorari to modify the award dated 12.04.1996 in I.T.I.D. No.3 of 1993 passed by the Chairman, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of the Court to permit the petitioners to withdraw the petition and the learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions, addressed a letter dated 02.06.2009 to the registry stating that petitioners intended to withdraw this writ petition. 3. In view of the representation made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, permission is accorded to withdraw the Writ Petition. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Dated June 4, 2009 KSH