IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2696 of 2009 Between: Kadapa Sheshanna, S/o. Pakeeranna, Mahabubnagar District, Palamoori Contract Labour Union, R/o. H.No. 7-5-14/A, Venkateshwara Colony,Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar District, ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation & Assistant Commissioner of Labour, At Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar District. 2 K. Sambashiva Rao, Managing Director, Progressive Constructions Co. Ltd. Medwin Hospital, Tilak Road, Hyderabad, AP 3 The Manager, Progressive Constructions Co. Ltd. Amkili, Rewa District, Madhya Pradesh 4 Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation & Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Ranga Reddy Zone, Hyderabad, A.P. 5 The Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company, Maharaja Hotel, Rewa District Through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Satna, Madhya Pradesh ..RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SHASHIKIRAN Counsel for the Respondents: --- The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.1 in not considering the representation of the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary. The facts, which are not denied, are that respondent No.1 by award dated 31-12-2004 awarded compensation of Rs.2,02,003/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of realization as compensation for the death of the petitioner’s husband. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said award is not being implemented. In my considered view, this writ petition is wholly misconceived. The award passed by respondent No.1 under the provisions of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923 is binding on the parties against whom the award is passed. If such an award is not implemented by those persons, who are liable for its implementation, the petitioner has got an effective remedy of seeking execution of the same under the above mentioned Act and the Rules made thereunder. The petitioner has not shown any reason for not availing the said remedy and instead rushed to this Court by way of this writ petition. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of filing an execution petition. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition, WPMP No.3463 of 2009 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 18th April, 2009 vrn