Kalyanmoy Ganguli, J. - (1.) In the instant application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, inter alia, pray for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to forbear from giving any effect or further effect to the purported notice of lockout issued by the respondent company on August 5, 1992 which is annexure 'I' to the petition and for cancelling, withdrawing and/or rescinding the same.
(2.) The principal challenge in the writ petition initially was that the purported lockout was illegal. During the course of hearing it was submitted by both the parties that the lockout had been lifted in the meantime. In fact, records were produced before this court by both the parties showing that the lockout stood lifted with effect from March 14, 1993. The respondents contended, inter alia, that as the subject matter of the writ petition was no longer in existence on the date of hearing of the writ petition, the substratum of the writ petitioner was gone and the writ petition had become infructuous and should be dismissed on that ground alone. The petitioners on the contrary, contended that in the exigencies of the circumstances the writ court has the power to mould the relief.
(3.) It is undoubtedly true that the writ court can 'mould' the prayer provided there is a logical connection of cause and effect between the original relief prayed for and the 'moulded' prayer.;