-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4165 OF 2008 Babasaheb S. Kamble ... Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra and another ... Respondents Mr. P.G. Sawant for the petitioner. CORAM: P.B. MAJMUDAR, J. DATE: JULY 21, 2008. P.C. By filing this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 29th September, 2000 passed by the Labour Court, Sangli in Complaint (ULP) No. 120 of 1992, by which the Labour Court has directed the respondent to pay Rs. 75,000/- to the petitioner in lieu of reinstatement. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the petitioner was in financial difficulty, he could not challenge the said order earlier. It is further submitted that even though against the order of the Labour Court revision lies before the Revisional Court, but in view of the financial difficulties, the petitioner has not approached the revisional Court also. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is required -2- to be noted that this petition is required to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches as the impugned order is passed in the year 2000. The petitioner has filed the petition after a considerable period of eight years. The Labour Court after considering the facts of the case has passed an order of compensation of Rs. 75,000/-. The said order, in my view, is not required to be interfered with in view of the fact that the petition is filed after a considerable delay. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also failed to point out any justifiable ground for such an inordinate delay in preferring this writ petition. In my view, this is a case in which this Court would like to interfere with the order of the Labour Court in its extraordinary jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Hence rejected. P.B. MAJMUDAR, J.