THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.17243 OF 2000 ORDER: Learned counsel for the petitioner advanced his submissions. There is no representation for the respondents. This petition is disposed of without hearing the respondents. 2. The petitioner was a casual labourer working with the second respondent. He was the casual labourer from 05.02.1984 till 1985 and again from 01.06.1992 till 26.09.1992. The petitioner claimed that he was a casual labourer for more than 333 days. 3. Alleging that the services of the petitioner were terminated, the petitioner raised an industrial dispute in I.D.No.42 of 1994 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal-I at Hyderabad. Through orders dated 31.08.1995, the Tribunal passed Award holding that the second respondent herein shall engage the petitioner as casual labourer afresh as and when work is available and that the name of the petitioner shall be included in the approved list of casual Mazdoors. Claiming that the Award of the Industrial Tribunal was not implemented, the writ petitioner has come forward with this petition for a writ of mandamus. 4. The second respondent has issued proceedings on 29.02.1996 that the name of the petitioner had been included in the waiting list and that the petitioner would be called as and when work was available. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the earlier list of casual Mazdoor had already been exhausted and that the respondents however had not allotted work to the petitioner so far. His primary contention is that the Award of the Industrial Tribunal deserves to be implemented. 5. Obviously, the order of the Industrial Tribunal is liable to be implemented, more particularly so where the order was passed on merits. The Industrial Tribunal directed that the services of the petitioner be engaged as and when vacancy arose. The proceedings were issued by the second respondent way back in 1996 informing the petitioner that his services would be engaged as a casual Mazdoor as and when the work was available. Respondent Nos.2 and 3, therefore, are directed to implement the orders passed by the Industrial Tribunal by engaging the services of the petitioner as causal labourer subject to the availability of work. 6. The Writ Petition is accordingly, ordered. No costs. __________________ K.G. SHANKAR, J December 10, 2010 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.17243 OF 2000 Between: Mulla Mohamed Zakriya .....PETITIONER AND The Industrial Tribunal and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.17243 OF 2000 December 10, 2010