IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.21962 of 2008 Between: G.V.Mohan S/o.G.Narayana, E.No.204528, Midhani Depot, R/o.1-7-1002/23,Ramnagar,Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Labour Court-I, IInd floor, Chandravihar Building, Hyderabad 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Falaknuma Depot, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari declaring the Award passed by the Respondent No.1 vide in I.D.No.17 of 2002 dated 29.3.2004 vide G.O.Rt.No.894 dated 5.6.2004 published on 13.7.2004 insofar as deprival of back wages and attendant beneﬁts of break period to the petitioner as illegal, unjust and arbitrary, and consequently direct the respondents to treat the reinstatement of the petitioner along with full back wages and attendant beneﬁts of break of period and pay the consequential beneﬁts to the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.THIRUPATHI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR LABOUR Counsel for the Respondent No.2: MR. K. MADHAVA REDDY The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.21962 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled questioning the award, dated 29.03.2004, passed in I.D.No.17 of 2002 on the ﬁle of the 1st respondent- Labour Court-I, Hyderabad, insofar as denying backwages and attendant beneﬁts to the petitioner, while ordering his reinstatement into service with continuity of service. There is no necessity of going into all the details. It is suﬃce to notice that the impugned award was passed on 29.03.2004 and it is more than four years since the said award was passed. The petitioner, having been reinstated into service with continuity of service pursuant to the impugned award, approached this Court after four years of passing of the said award questioning the denial of backwages and attendant beneﬁts by the Labour Court. There is no plausible explanation from the petitioner for the inordinate delay caused in approaching this Court. The writ petition suﬀers from irretrievable laches and is, therefore, liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. _________________ JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU 14th October, 2008. IBL