ORDER 1. HEARD LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES. 2. WE FIND THAT TWO WRIT PETITIONS WERE FILED; ONE BY THE PRESENT APPELLANT AND THE OTHER BY THE PRESENT RESPONDENT. WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE APPELLANT WAS NUMBERED AS CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION NO. 47303 OF 1999 AND THE RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION WAS NUMBERED AS CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION NO. 13679 OF 2000. THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE PRESENT APPELLANT CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER WHILE IN THE RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION CHALLENGE WAS TO THE LEGALITY OF THE AWARD MADE BY THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL DATED 30-7-1999. THE BASIC ISSUE INVOLVED IN BOTH THE WRIT PETITIONS IS THE STATUS OF THE WORKMEN CONCERNED I.E. WHETHER THEY WERE CONTRACT LABOURERS OR H WHETHER THEY WERE EMPLOYEES OF THE APPELLANT CORPORATION. THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN DISMISSED WHILE THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IS STILL PENDING ADJUDICATION. THE ISSUES ARE INTERLINKED AND, THEREFORE, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATE FOR THE HIGH COURT TO TAKE UP BOTH THE WRIT PETITIONS TOGETHER FOR DISPOSAL. IN THIS BACKGROUND, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE HIGH COURT AND REMIT THE WRIT PETITION TO THE HIGH COURT FOR CONSIDERATION ALONG WITH THE OTHER WRIT PETITION NOTED ABOVE. 3. WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WE HAVE NOT EXPRESSED ANY OPINION ON THE MERIT OF THE RESPECTIVE STAND. SINCE THE WRIT PETITIONS ARE OF THE YEAR 1999/2000, WE REQUEST THE HIGH COURT TO DISPOSE OF THE WRIT PETITIONS AS EARLY AS PRACTICABLE, PREFERABLY WITHIN SIX MONTHS FROM THE COMMUNICATION OF THIS ORDER. THE APPEAL IS ACCORDINGLY DISPOSED OF. NO ORDER AS TO COSTS.