- 1 - VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION No. 2351 OF 2009 The Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (Polyster Plant) ..Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. A. V. Sukhari i/b A. Jaisalgi, for the Petitioner. Mrs. S. S. Bhende, AGP for Respondent No.1. Mr. Rahul D. Oak, for Respondent No.2. Mr. Suresh S. Patole, for Respondent No. 6. CORAM : D. D. SINHA & A. A. SAYED , JJ. DATED : JANUARY 18, 2010. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGP for respondent No.1, leanred counsel for respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners has brought to our notice that in paragraph 3 of the order dated 11th January 2010 the contentions canvassed by Mr. C. J. Sawant, the learned Senior Counsel were recorded. However in 3rd line of that paragraph due to inadvertence instead of word “for” before the word PSF, the word “the” is recorded, - 2 - and after the word “PSF” there should have been comma but instead of that the word “is the” is recorded. It is contended that these are the averments which are made in paragraph 14 of the writ petition, which were read out to this Court by Mr. C. J. Sawant, the learned Senior Counsel. It is therefore, prayed that appropriate correction in third line of paragraph 3 of the order dated 11th January 2010 may be effected. We have checked and found that in paragraph 3 the contentions canvassed by the learned Senior Counsel before the Court are recorded and therefore, we direct the office to carry out the following corrections- In the third line of paragraph 3 of the order dated 11th January 2010, the word “the” before the word PSF be replaced by the word “for” and the words “is the” after the word PSF be replaced by comma i.e. “,”. With these corrections, rest of the order is confirmed. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners has brought to our notice that the representation dated 14th December 2008 annexed with the writ petition at Exhibit “D” was submitted to the Secretary, Industry & Labour Department, Sachivalaya, Mumbai which is pending for decision. The learned AGP was granted one week time to seek instructions and make the statement today within what time the said representation dated 14th December 2008 submitted would be decided by the Government on its own merit and in accordance with the law. The - 3 - learned AGP on the basis of the instructions received from Mr. C. R. Gosavi, Dy. Secretary, Indusry, Energy and Labour Department, Sachivalaya, Mumbai has made a categorical statement that in order to decide the said representation advisory committee will have to be constituted under section 14 of the Maharashtra Mathadi Hamal and other Manual Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare Act) 1969 and the said committee will be constituted within a period of 5 weeks and the representation dated 14th December 2008 submitted by the petitioners will be finally decided on its own merit and in accordance with the law, by following the principles of natural justice within a period of six weeks from the date, the Committee is constituted. 3. In view of the categorical statement made by the learned AGP, we do not propose to keep the present writ petition pending in this Court. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of. It is made clear that it will be open for the petitioners to question the order if it is adverse to them. Sd/- [D. D. SINHA, J.] Sd/- [ A. A. SAYED, J.]