IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY WRIT PETITION Nos.7636 and 8645 of 2000 WRIT PETITION Nos.7636 of 2000 Between: Varanasi Srinivas. … Petitioner And The Dy. Executive Engineer, Marketing, Near Butchemma Koneru, Vizianagaram and another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri V.Sudhakar Reddy. Counsel for the respondents: None for R.1 and R.2. WRIT PETITION Nos.8645 of 2000 Between: The Agricultural Market Committee, Bobbili, Vizianagaram District, reptd., by its Secretary- Sri K.S.Prakasa Rao. … Petitioner And: Varanasi Srinivas and another. … Respondents. Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Madhava Reddy. Counsel for the respondents: Sri V.Sudhakar Reddy for R.1. None for R.2. This Court made the following: COMMON ORDER:- These two Writ Petitions are filed questioning award dated 9-8-1999 in I.D.No.106 of 1996 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam. By the impugned award, the workman has been directed to be reinstated with back wages from the date of the petition. Writ Petition No.7636 of 2000: This Writ Petition is filed by the workman feeling aggrieved by denial of back wages from the date of his retrenchment. A perusal of the award shows that the workman approached the Industrial Tribunal eight years after his retrenchment and keeping this in mind, the Tribunal directed that he should be paid back wages from the date of the petition. In my considered view, this reasoning of the Tribunal does not suffer from any error. As the delay of eight years was the petitioner’s own making, he cannot be allowed to take advantage of his own fault in not approaching the Tribunal earlier. In this view of the matter, the award of the Tribunal in not granting back wages to the petitioner till the date of raising of the dispute does not suffer from any illegality warranting this Court’s interference. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. Writ Petition No.8645 of 2000: This Writ Petition is filed by the Agricultural Market Committee, Bobbili, Vizianagaram District, questioning the above-mentioned award. The Marketing Committee is not a party to the industrial dispute. However, it filed the present Writ Petition on the premise that its interests are vitally affected by the direction to reinstate respondent No.1-workman. At the hearing, Sri V.Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.1 placed before me letter dated 18-8-2001 addressed by the Director of Marketing to the Deputy Executive Engineer, Marketing, Vizianagaram, instructing him to reinstate respondent No.1 into service. He pleaded that respondent No.1 is in the direct service of the Marketing Department. However, Sri Madhava Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that prior to retrenchment of respondent No.1, he was working in petitioner-Market Committee and, therefore, it felt aggrieved by the award. However, it has no come out that respondent No.1 is presently working under the control of Deputy Executive Engineer, Marketing, Vizianagaram. In view of this fact, the petitioner cannot be treated as an aggrieved party and this Writ Petition need not be adjudicated on its merits. The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:04-12-2008 MNR