IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 1478 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 09/09/2008 in WP NO : 15878 OF 2007 on the file of the High Court.) Between: B. Devadanam S/o. rajaratnam Chennuru Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society Chennuru, R/o. Chennuru, Pedana Mandal, Krishna District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 Y.V. Satyanarayana, President The Chennuru Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society Limited, Chennuru, R/o. Chennuru, Krishna District. 2 Appellate Authority Under Section 53 of the A.P.S.E. Act Cum Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Eluru, West Godavari District. 3 The Assistant Commissioner of Labour Cum Authority Under Section 48 of the A.P.S.E. Act, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 4 Krishna District Co-operative Central (KDCC) Bank Limited, Machilipatnam, Krishna District, Rep. by its General Manager. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) Being aggrieved by an interim order dated 9-9-2008 passed in W.P.M.P.No. 19184 of 2008 and W.P.M.P.No.20127 of 2007 in W.P.No. 15878 of 2007, this appeal has been filed. The appellant-workman was dismissed from service. Being aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the workman had approached the Assistant Commissioner of Labour who set aside the order of dismissal and directed the reinstatement of the appellant-workman. Being aggrieved by the order of reinstatement, respondent No.4-employer in this appeal, ﬁled W.P.No. 15878 of 2007. The said petition has been admitted and an interim order has been passed whereby it has been directed that the appellant-workman be paid wages as per Section 48(4) of the A.P. Shops and Establishments Act, 1988. It is not in dispute that wages as per the said provision are being paid after initiation of the proceedings in this Court. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant-workman has submitted that the workman should be paid back wages also. In our opinion the appellant-workman is not entitled to back wages at this stage. He can get the same, provided he succeeds in the petition. In the circumstances, we do not ﬁnd any substance in the appeal and, therefore, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. _______________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ ____________________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 12th November, 2008. GRR