IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 7596 of 2000 Between: 1 Shantimoy Mandal S/o.Jolandhar Mandal EWS-89, Fishermen Colony, MVP Colony, Visakhapatnam-17. 2 Kartick Chandra Dutta S/o.Shastipada Dutta Q.No.EWS-4, Fishermen Colony, MVP Colony, Visakhapatnam-17. 3 Narotham Ram Sahu S/o. Late Sukha Ram, MIG-4-51/28, Samathanagar, Peda Gantyada, Visakhapatnam-530 044. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Chairman & Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam, 2 General Manager Engineering Projects (India) Ltd., 50, Chouringhee Road, Calcutta-700 071. .....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 call for the records from the 1st Respondent and issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari and quash the order award passed by the 1st Respondent in I.D.No.32/96 and M.Ps.35/97, 36/97 and 37/97 dt:15.9.99 published on 17.12.1999 and declared that the petitioners are entitled for the relief, prayed for or alternatively remand the matter to the learned 1st Respondent to assess the entire material and law placed on record and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.J.RAMACHANDRA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: 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 quash the order passed by Respondent No.1 in I.D. No.32 of 1996 and M.Ps No.35 of 1997, 36 of 1997 and 37 of 1997 published on 17.12.1997 and declared that the petitioners are entitled for the relief prayed for. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners seek 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 21.07.2009 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 Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J July 22, 2009 KSH