THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITON No.28197 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner claims that he was engaged as Attender on 03.06.1993 by the Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Ungutur Mandal, West Godavari District, 2nd respondent herein, but was retrenched orally with effect from 28.06.1995. The petitioner contends that the oral retrenchment is contrary to Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short ‘the Act’) and since the subsequent recruitment has taken place, he was entitled to be considered under Section 25-H of the Act. This writ petition is filed with a prayer to direct respondents 1 and 2 to consider his case for appointment as Attender and to pay compensation. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The so-called retrenchment is said to have taken place way back in the year 1995. The petitioner approached this Court in the year 2011. Even if there exists any scope for interference with the alleged retrenchment, the claim cannot be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, after a lapse of one and half decades. Even otherwise, if any individual feels aggrieved that he has been retrenched in violation of Section 25-F of the Act, he has to approach the Labour Court. It is only when the retrenchment is found to be valid, that the necessity to insist to invoke Section 25-H of the Act would arise. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail such remedies as are open to him in law. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 18.10.2011 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITON No.28197 of 2011 Date: 18.10.2011 JSU