1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. WRIT PETITION NO.449 OF 2007 Maharashtra Suraksha Rakshak Aghadi. ...Petitioner. Vs. The Security Guards Board for Gr. Bombay and Thane District & Ors. ...Respondents. .... Ms. R. J. Todankar for the Petitioner. Mr. A. M. Khandekar i/b. Mr. M.S. Topkar for Respondent No.1. Mr. R.S. Pai with Mr. T.R. Yadav for Respondent No.3. ..... CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. July 30, 2007. P.C. : Counsel appearing for Respondent No.3 contends that the factory has already been closed and as such the Act is not applicable. This is disputed by the Petitioner. According to them, it is being used as the storage and for other purposes. Be that as it may, this factual controversy need not be gone into in the exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. Counsel appearing for the parties, during the course of the arguments, fairly conceded that the present Writ Petition is squarely 2 covered by recent judgments of this Court in Writ Petition No.563 of 2007 dated 21st June 2007 and Writ Petition (Lodging) No.1323 of 2007 dated 19th July 2007 and be disposed of in terms of the directions issued in that case. However, the time schedule provided in that order shall be construed as if the time for compliance with the first date commences from today. 3. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid terms. CHIEF JUSTICE Dr.D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.