IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.24166 of 2008 Between: T. Sambaiah S/o. Kondaiah Post & Village Madharam, Mandal Parkala, Warangal District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Hon'ble Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Warangal, Rep. by its Presiding Officer, Warangal District. 2 The Superintending Engineer, Warangal Circle, (R&B) Department, Nakkalagutta, Hanamkonda. 3 The Executive Engineer, Regular Division, (R&B) Department, Hanamkonda, Warangal. .....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 call for the records from the Respondents herein by issuing a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari by quashing the Award dt.25-7-2003 in I.D.No.21 of 1998 published vide G.O.Rt.No.1700 dt.3-9-2003 on the ﬁle of 1st respondent as perverse, illegal, unjust, contrary to law, and also in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents herein to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service, back wages, attendant benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.SRIDHAR RAO Counsel for Respondent No.1: GP FOR LABOUR Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 & 3: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.24166 OF 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled challenging the award dated 25.07.2003 passed in I.D.No.21 of 1998 on the ﬁle of the 1st respondent- Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Warangal, whereunder the claim petition ﬁled by the petitioner, under Section 2-A (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, questioning the oral termination of his services, was dismissed. There is no necessity of going into all the details. It is suﬃce to notice that the impugned award was passed on 25.07.2003 and it is more than ﬁve years since the said award was passed. 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 05th November, 2008. IBL