1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3638 OF 2006 [Kishor Onkar Mahajan Vs. The Union of India and others ] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders Shri.M.P.Tripati, Advocate for Petitioner Shri Alok Sharma,stand counsel for respondent No.1-The Union of India. Shri V.B.Ghatge,A.G.P.for respondent No.2 and 3. Shri A.B.Kale,Advocate for respondent No. 1. .... CORAM: NAARESH H.PATIL AND K. K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 22ND JULY, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioners’ grievance is that they were appointed by the Respondent No. 5, but they did not continue thereafter, under the scheme floated by the Central Government namely, “Setting up of 2 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders Employment-Cum-Income Generating Units for women” by the department of Women and Child Development Ministry of Human Resources Development. 3. The petition was filed in the year 2006. The petitioners have not made complaint to the State Committee nor any representation was made to anybody. 4. In the light of the above, no interference is called for in exercise of our extra ordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner may resort to alternative remedy as permissible in law. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- Sd/- [K.K. TATED,J.] [NAARESH H. PATIL,J.] MTK 3 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders