IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 706 of 2001 Between: Anumala Chandraiah, S/o Venkata Ramaiah R/o Choppadandi Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant Director, Handlooms & Textiles, Karimnagar. 2 H. Vaman Rao Handlooms & Textiles O/o Handlooms and Textiles, Karimnagar (Sale Officer), Handlooms and Textiles, Karimnagar. ..RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.RAMESH SAGAR Counsel for the respondents GP FOR INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for a writ of Certiorari to call for records passed in ARC No.7124/93-D on the file of the arbitrator in holding that the petitioner misappropriated the sum of Rs.3,60,157-57 ps from the funds of Sri Ramakrishna Handloom Weavers Cooperative Society, Choppadandi, Karimnagar District and as confirmed in CTA No.686 of 1996 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Tribunal, Hyderabad. On 13-02-2009 this Court, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, passed the following order. “A perusal of the record shows that though the petitioner questioned the validity of the arbitrator’s award in ARC No.7124/93-D, surprisingly the award has not been filed and is not available in the record. Unless a copy of the award is filed, it is not possible for this Court to appreciate the pleas raised by the petitioner with regard to the legal errors, if any, contained in the said award. As the petitioner has not given any reasons for not filing the award, and in the absence of such an award the writ petition cannot be entertained and adjudicated on merits, the writ petition is, therefore, dismissed on this ground alone.” After passing of the above reproduced order, this Court suo motu reopened the case to give one opportunity to the petitioner to file a copy of the award. Accordingly, the case was posted on 20-02-2009 under the caption “for being mentioned.” When the learned counsel, representing Sri C.Ramesh Sagar, appeared, she was informed by the Court that the order passed on 13-02-2009 will be reconsidered if the copy of arbitrator’s award is produced within one week. The case was accordingly adjourned to 27-02-2009. Today, when the case was taken up, the learned counsel representing the petitioner submitted that further time is required for producing the award. In my considered view, the petitioner failed not only to file the arbitrator’s award, which was an essential document to maintain the writ petition, but also to avail the further opportunity given to him. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed by reiterating the reasons mentioned by this Court on 13-02-2009 as reproduced hereinabove. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 27th February, 2009 vrn/kvni