IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 266 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 17/07/2007 in WP NO : 22329 OF 2006 on the file of the High Court.) Between: The State of Andhra Pradesh, through The Forest Range officer,"Deer Park Mahavir Harina" Vanasthalipuram, Hayathnagar Mandal Ranga REddy District ..... APPELLANT AND Sri .Mohd.Anwar S/o.Mohd.Jahangir, C/o.Mohd.,Ghouse H.No.6-3-1241/161, Opp:Raj Bhavan Maqata Madar Sab, Khairatabad, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant:GP FOR FORESTS Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.P.RAGHAVENDRA REDDY The Court made the following : Order: (Per Anil R. Dave, CJ) By virtue of this appeal, order dated 17-7-2007 passed in W.V.M.P.No.1577 of 2007 and W.P.M.P.No.28360 of 2006 in W.P.No. 22329 of 2006 has been challenged. The respondent was working under the appellant and as his services have been terminated without following the due procedure, he had approached the Labour Court under the provisions of the I.D. Act and the Labour Court had finally passed an Award dated 7-9-2004 whereby the appellant has been directed to reinstate the respondent-workman into service. Being aggrieved by the Award, Writ Petition No. 22329 of 2006 has been filed by the appellant. By an interim order, the learned single Judge has directed that the Award should be implemented during the pendency of the petition and being aggrieved by the aforestated order, this appeal has been filed. We have heard the learned Advocates. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that the Forest Department is not an ‘industry’ and therefore, the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 are not applicable. It has been further submitted that by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.2 EFS & T (For.III) Dept. dated 7-1-2004, the appellant cannot reinstate the respondent-workman in the post which is not in existence. Upon hearing the learned Advocates, we are of the view that the question whether the Forest Department is an ‘industry’ as per the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 can be decided at the time of final hearing of the petition and at this stage we need not go into the said issue. Looking to the facts, in our opinion, the learned single Judge had rightly directed the appellant to implement the Award and therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned single Judge. The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. The learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the appellant seeks time to implement the order. Two weeks’ time from today is granted for implementing the order. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 13th March, 2008 GRR To 1. 2.2 CD copies