THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY W.P.No.4210 of 2006 DATED:06.03.2006 BETWEEN: D. Shankar ..Petitioner And The Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Warangal, represented by its Presiding Officer. and another ..Respondents ORDER: The petitioner, who is an ex-conductor in the A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, has filed this writ petition questioning the common order, dated 27.02.2006, passed in S.R.Nos.691 and 692 of 2006, by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Warangal. After recording a finding on the preliminary issue with regard to the validity of domestic enquiry, opportunity was given to both the parties to adduce their evidence. Thereupon, the petitioner himself was examined as WW.1 and a passenger as WW.2. As the other side reported no evidence, the matter was posted for arguments. At that stage, these two interlocutory applications came to be filed; one for reopening of the evidence and the other for issuing summons to the other passenger, as he refused to come and give evidence unless he receives summons. The Court below rejected the said applications through the impugned common order. In this writ petition, it is submitted by Sri V. Narasimha Goud, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, that if an opportunity is given to the petitioner, no prejudice will be caused to the respondents. It is to be seen that I.D. is of 1999 and the petitioner himself was examined apart from examining another passenger. When the other side reported no evidence, the matter was posted for arguments. In that view of the matter, there is absolutely no valid reason to consider the request of the petitioner either for reopening of evidence or to summon the other passenger. I do not see any illegality in the order of the Tribunal. The writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY,J Dated:06.03.2006 GJ