IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 9902 of 1999 Between: A.Madanmohan, S/o. Narsaiah. R/o. Jyothinagar, N.T.P.C., Ramagundam, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Dy.Commissioner of Labour, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Labour Department, Warangal. 2 The Additional General Manager, N.T.P.C., Limited, Ramagundam, Karimnagar District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue Writ order or direction, especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus: (i) to declare the Impugned Proc.No.C1/374/99 dated 22/04/1999 issued by 1st respondent and the consequential proceeding No.09/P&A/IR/99/2155 dated 26/04/1999, issued by the 2nd respondent as illegal arbitrary and set aside the same; (ii) direct the 2nd respondent to Recognise the list of Office-bearers affected by the General Body Meeting of NTPC Telugunadu Employees Union held on 06/02/1999; (iii) and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.VASUDEVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : ORDER : This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus to declare the proceedings No.C1/374/99, dated 22.04.1999 issued by R.I and the consequential proc. No.09/P&A/IR/99/2155 dated 26.04.1999 issued by the R.II as illegal, arbitrary and to direct respondent No.2 to recognize the list of office bearers elected by the General Body meeting of N.T.P.C Telugunadu Employees Union held on 06.02.1999. 2. Sri Vasudeva Reddy, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, represents that this petition became infructuous. Therefore, this petition is liable to be dismissed. 3. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Dated June 4, 2009 KSH