:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5707 OF 1995 Shri Subhash Jaysingh Chavan ..Petitioner Vs. M/s. Prabhakar Engineers Pvt. Ltd. and anr. ..Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5708 OF 1995 Shri Shauraj Devidas Shendge ..Petitioner Vs. M/s. Prabhakar Engineers Pvt. Ltd. and anr. ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5709 OF 1995 Shri Dattaram Ganpat Tawade ..Petitioner Vs. M/s. Prabhakar Engineers Pvt. Ltd. and anr. ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5710 OF 1995 Shri Gangaram B. Nagawade ..Petitioner Vs. M/s. Prabhakar Engineers Pvt. Ltd. and anr. ..Respondents WITH :2: WRIT PETITION NO. 5711 OF 1995 Ramchandra Baburao Mohite ..Petitioner Vs. M/s. Prabhakar Engineers Pvt. Ltd. and anr. ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5712 OF 1995 Sakharam Dashrath Taksal ..Petitioner Vs. M/s. Prabhakar Engineers Pvt. Ltd. and anr. ..Respondents Mr. Nitin A. Kulkarni for petitioner in all the petitions. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J. Date : January 28, 2008. Date : January 28, 2008. Date : January 28, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. These petitions impugn the awards passed by the Labour Court in Reference (IDA) Nos.218, 216, 214, 215, 219 and 217 of 1987. 2. Mr. Kulkarni the learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed out that when these petitions were admitted on 7/12/1995, they were directed to be clubbed and heard along with Writ Petition Nos.5628, :3: 5629, 5630, 5633 and 5635 of 1995. 3. The awards impugned in these petitions by the workmen were impugned by the employer in Writ Petition Nos. 5628, 5629, 5630, 5633 and 5635 of 1995 and Mr. Kulkarni states that all these petitions filed by the employer i.e. the present respondent have been allowed by this court and the impugned awards have been quashed and set aside. Mr. Kulkarni, therefore, rightly states that nothing further survives in these petitions as the impugned awards have already been quashed and set aside by this court by allowing the writ petitions filed by the present respondent-employer. 4. Hence, these petitions are dismissed as infructuous. Rule discharged. (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.)