IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO:17486 of 1999 Between: 1 K.Hanumantha Rao, S/o. K.Satyanarayana, R/o. Rasoolpura, Secunderabad. 2 T.Somanatham, S/o. T.Mallaiah, R/o. Plot No.142, Santhoshima Colony, Neredmet, Secunderabad. 3 K.Gnaneshwar, S/o. K.Laxmaiah, R/o. 18-7-584, Lal darwaza, Chatrinaka, Boiguda, Hyderabad. 4 T.Modan Mohan, S/o. T.Gopaiah, R/o. Plot No.352, HMT Shathavahana Nagar, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 72. 5 A.Uma Maheshwar Rao, S/o. Kottaiah, R/o. Plot No.511 HMT Hills ,JNTUC, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 HMT Ltd., Rep.by it's chairman & Managing director, Bellary Road, Bangalore, Karnataka State. 2 HMT Ltd., Rep.by it's General Manager, Lamp Unit, Balanagar, Hyderabad 500 054. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.G.VIDYASAGAR The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “For the reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in retiring the petitioners voluntarily with retrospective effect from 1.4.1998 is illegal, discriminatory and amounts to unfair labour practice and consequently direct the Respondents herein to take back the petitioners into service and accommodate them in any of the units situated at Hyderabad.” At the hearing, Sri G.Vidyasagar, learned counsel for the petitioners reported that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for consideration. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition as infructuous, WPMP.No.21757 of 1999 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 18th DECEMBER, 2008. kvni