[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION W.P.NO.2226 OF 2005 Hindoostan Crown Mills Siddhivinayak Kamgar Karmachari Sangharsh Sanghatana & Anr. ..Petitioners Vs. The Hindoostan Spg. and Wvg. Mills Ltd.and Ors. ..Respondents ... Mr.N.M.Ganguli Senior Counsel for Petitioners Mr.S.H.Doctor, Senior Counsel i/b Federal & Rashmikant for Respondent No.1 Mr.Deepak Thakkar i/b Pragna Thakkar & Co. for Respondent No.2 Ms.Vidya Shreedharan i/b Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe for Respondent No.7 Mrs.P.A.Purandhare Adv.for Respondent No.8 Ms.Hutoxi Tavadia i/b Mahesh Thorat Adv. for Respondent No.10 Mr.S.S.Pakale with Mr.K.J.Kanpile Adv. for Repsondent No.12 Mr.S.M.Dixit Spl.Counsel for Respondent Nos.4, 11 and 12. ... CORAM: F.I.REBELLO AND CORAM: F.I.REBELLO AND CORAM: F.I.REBELLO AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATE : AUGUST 1,2006 DATE : AUGUST 1,2006 DATE : AUGUST 1,2006 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The Union by this petition, challenged the order of A.A.I.F.R. which partly allowed the appeal preferred by Respondent No.1 to the extent of asking the Provident Fund Commissioner and Directors of Central Excise Customs to grant the benefits which [-2-] have been granted instead of merely considering them. Petitioners can really have no grievance on that ground. Considering the above, no case is made out for interference by this Court in exercise of our extra ordinary writ jurisdiction. Hence, petition is rejected. [ F.I.REBELLO, J.] [ SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]