IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 19965 of 2008 Between: V.Prabhu Kumar, S/o. Shankaraiah, C/o. M.Mahadeva Sastry,H.No.5-32, Durga Nagar, Dilsukhanagar, Hyderabad-36 ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Zaheerabad Depot, Medak District, 2 The Presiding Officer, labour court-II, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order Dated 6-9-2000 of the 2nd respondent directing the 1st respondent to reinstate the petitioner as fresh recruit without back wages, etc, as illegal, unjust and against the principles of natural justice and provisions of the Constitution and consequently to set aside that part of the award directing the 1st respondent to pay the petitioner all his back wages from 03.04.1989 upto dated with all continuity of service, attendant beneﬁts, consequential increments, grades, etc., and other benefits and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.I.VARAHA GIRI Counsel for the Respondent No.: K.MADHAVA REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : ORDER This writ petition is directed against an award made in I.D.No.99 of 1993 dated 6.9.2000 on the ﬁle of Labour Court-III, Hyderabad. There is no necessity to go into all the details. It is suﬃce to notice that the award was passed on 6th September, 2000 directing the respondent to reinstate the petitioner as a fresh recruit. No other relief was granted. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is ﬁled on 22nd August, 2008 i.e., after more than eight years. The abnormal delay in approaching this Court is not explained. Therefore, I am of the view that the writ petition suﬀers from irretrievable laches and is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone. Writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. __________ 19-09-2008 rkk