IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY WRIT APPEAL No: 1503 of 2000 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 08/06/2000 in WP No: 24197 OF 1998 on the file of the High Court.) BETWEEN: The agriculture Market Committee, Badepally, Rep by its Secretary Mahabubnagar Dist ... APPELLANT AND 1 The Labour Court Rep by its Presiding Officer, Chandra Vihar Building, M.J. Road, Hyderabad. 2 B. Venkataiah, C/o. A.K. Jaya Prakash Rao Advocate H.No.3-4- 206/2, Lingampally , Hyderabad –27. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: MRS.NANDA R. RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V. Eswaraiah) The Agricultural Market Committee, Badepally, Mahabubnagar District, is the appellant, who ﬁled this writ appeal aggrieved by the order of the Learned Single Judge of this Court in WP.No.24197 of 1998 filed by the second respondent. 2. The Learned Single Judge of this Court by order dated 08.06.2000 in WP.No.24197 of 1998, modiﬁed the award of the Labour Court – III, Hyderabad in I.D.No.141 of 1995 dated 20.11.1997, directing the appellant herein to reinstate the writ petitioner/second respondent herein into service within a period of two months from the date of service of notice and held that the writ petitioner is also entitled for continuity of service as well as other attendant beneﬁts. 3. This Court while admitting the writ appeal directed the appellant herein to take work from the writ petitioner or pay him the last wages drawn in terms of principles contained in Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act. 4. As it was represented on 04.10.2005 that the writ petitioner/second respondent herein died, the matter was adjourned for taking necessary steps, but no steps have been taken. When the matter came up for hearing on 10.09.2008, We have also given four more weeks time for taking steps to bring the legal representatives of the second respondent on record on a further condition that in the event of failure to comply the same, the writ appeal stands dismissed. Admittedly, no steps have been taken and no application has been ﬁled to modify the said conditional order, therefore, We are of the opinion that the appeal stands abated against the second respondent. The writ appeal accordingly stands dismissed as abated. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J _________________ G.V. SEETHAPATHY, J October 15, 2008 DSK