IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 20666 of 2008 Between: Amjad Khan S/o. Mahboob Khan Ramnagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Industrial Tribunal-I 1st Floor, Chandravihar Bilding, M.J. Market, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Hakimpet Depot, R.R. District. .....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 or writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of "Certiorari" or any other appropriate writ declaring the Award passed by Respondent No.1-Industrial Tribunal-I vide in ID No. 115 of 2001 (Old ID No. 692/2003) dt. 12-8-2003, vide G.O.Rt.No. 1893 dt. 25-9-2003, published on 15-11-2003 in so far as deprival of continuity of service, attendant beneﬁts, back wages, as illegal, unjust and arbitrary, and consequently direct the Respondents to treat the reinstatement of the petitioner with continuity of service, all attendant beneﬁts and back wages and pay all the consequential beneﬁts in the interest of justice and fair play. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.THIRUPATHI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR LABOUR Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI K.MADHAVA REDDY The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.20666 OF 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled questioning the award dated 12.08.2003 passed in I.D.No.115 of 2001 on the ﬁle of the Industrial Tribunal-I, Hyderabad, insofar as denying continuity of service, backwages and other attendant beneﬁts to the petitioner, while ordering his reinstatement into service. There is no necessity of going into all the details. It is suﬃce to notice that the impugned award was passed on 12.08.2003 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 23rd September, 2008. IBL