HON’BLE SHRI G.S. SINGHVI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE Writ Petition No. 9913 of 1997 Between: B. Bhujanga Reddy & others …Petitioners And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Hyderabad & others ….Respondents. :: O R D E R :: Counsel for the petitioners : None 04.04.2007 In this petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the termination of their services with effect from 31.03.1996, 31.03.1996, 31.05.1995 and 07.07.1997 respectively. Since no one has appeared for the petitioners, it is reasonable to presume that they are not interested in prosecuting the writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed in default. Even otherwise, I am satisfied that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed because the petitioners’ prayer for reinstatement is essentially founded on their plea that the action taken by the employer is violative of the provisions of Chapter V-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the Act’) and for redressal of grievance in such matters, an effective alternative remedy is available to the petitioner by raising industrial dispute under Section 2-A(2) of the Act. In this connection, reference can usefully be made to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Premier Automobiles Ltd. V. Kamlakar S. Wadke[1] and Rajasthan SRTC v. Krishna Kant[2]. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition in default, W.P.M.P.No.12094 of 1997 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. G.S.SINGHVI, CJ 04.04.2007 ksld [1] 1975 (2) LLJ 445 [2] 1994(1) LLJ 136 (SC)