1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2603 OF 2009 Saffique Ahmed Vajir Mulla @ Shafikar R. Mohammed Vajir. ....Petitioner vs Ismail Khan Abdul Khan ....Respondent ALONGWITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2300 OF 2009 Saffique Ahmed Vajir Mulla @ Shafikar R. Mohammed Vajir. ....Petitioner vs Dilip Kisan Kapadnis ....Respondent Mr. M.R. Lad for the Petitioners. Mr. Sanjeev Hariakar h/f Mr. Sandeep Dadwal for the Respondents. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 2ND FEBRUARY, 2010. P.C. :- 1. The impugned order warrants no interference. The record 2 annexed to the petition itself indicates that the Labour Court had granted several opportunities to the Petitioners at every stage. The Written Statement was taken on record, although it was filed after considerable delay. The Petitioners were allowed to cross-examine the Respondent- workman although the Petitioners were absent on the earlier occasions when the Respondents were available for cross-examination. In fact, the cross-examination was permitted even after arguments on behalf of the Respondents had concluded. Thereafter, on several occasions there were applications by the Petitioners for adjournments, which were granted. Ultimately, the Petitioners advocate filed a pursis that inspite of repeated efforts and correspondence by the advocate, he had not received any response from the Petitioners. He, therefore, filed a no- instructions pursis. In these circumstances, the Labour Court could hardly be faulted for having proceeded with the hearing. 2. The cross-examination of the Respondent does not dislodge his case in any respect. The relevant records were also not produced by the Petitioners. 3. In the circumstances, both the Writ Petitions are dismissed.