1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1482 OF 1998 Maharashtra Suraksha Rakshak General Kamgar Association & Ors. .. Petitioners V/s The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.N.K.Mudnaney for the Petitioners. CORAM : D.K.DESHMUKH & R.G.KETKAR, JJ. DATE : 13th August, 2009. P.C.: 1. By this petition, the petitioners have challenged a Resolution passed by Respondent No.2- Board dated 29.4.1997. By that resolution the Board has adopted a policy of permitting deduction from the payment to be made to the Security Guards for the benefit of two Trade Unions. A grievance of the petitioners is that such a deduction should be permitted in favour of petitioners Trade Union also. 2. It appears that the State Government had issued a direction to the Security Guards Board to discontinue the practice of making deduction from the wages of the private Security Guards who are the 2 members of the Trade Unions. Writ Petition No.279 of 1989 was filed by the Trade Union by name Maharashtra Rajya Suraksha Rakshak General Kamgar Union. That petition was decided by an order dated 27.9.1996. Perusal of that order shows that the learned Single Judge who decided that petition found that the directive issued by the State Government was not in accordance with law, but the learned Single Judge did not set aside the direction issued by the State Government. The learned Single Judge directed the Board to formulate the policy for making deduction. It is pursuant to that direction that the Resolution dated 29.4.1997 was passed in favour of two Trade Unions. Though it does appear that the Board was not justified in permitting deduction in favour of those two Trade Unions whose office bearers were members of the Security Guards Board, still we can neither set aside the Resolution of the Board granting facility restricted to two Trade Unions because the Petitioners have chosen not to join those two Trade Unions as parties to the petition, and we can also not issue direction to the Board to extend the facility to the Petitioners because order of the State Government which was challenged in the Writ Petition No.279 of 1989 directing the Board not to make deduction is still in force as the learned Single Judge who decided the Writ Petition No.279 of 1989 did not set aside the same and it is also not challenged in the present petition. 3. If the Government direction is in force, unless that direction is set 3 aside, no direction for making deduction in favour of any Trade Union can be made by the Court. In this petition, no relief can be granted to the Petitioners. Petition is therefore disposed of. Rule discharged. No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (R.G.KETKAR, J.)