1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 147 OF 2008 Anand Pershad Jaiswal & Ors. ... Petitioners Versus Union of India & Anr. ...Respondents. Mr. R.M. Kadam with Ms. Meenakshi Iyer and Ms. Jasmine Daruwalla for the petitioners Mr. Anant Upadhyay i/by Mr. Shaunak Satpute for Respondent No.2. CORAM: B ILAL NAZKI and S.A. BOBDE, JJ. DATE: FEBRUARY 7, 2008. P.C.:- The grievance of the petitioners is that they had made a complaint before respondent No. 2, but no action was taken on the complaint so far. 2. On the last occasion, we directed the counsel for respondent No. 2 to get instructions. He submits, on instructions, that the complaint has been received, and a show-cause notice was issued to the Company, against which the complaint was made, in October, 2007. A reply has also been received from the Company on 28th November, 2007, and they are in the process of taking a decision over the complaint, and it will take some time. 2 3. In this view, we do not think that it will be necessary to take any further steps in the matter, and keep the matter on Board. We, accordingly, dispose of this Writ Petition, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, directing respondent No. 2 to complete the investigation within a period of eight weeks. It shall be open to respondent No. 2 to even call petitioner No. 1 for any assistance or information, if they so require, during the conduct of investigation. Petitioner No. 1 is at liberty to approach respondent No. 2 with any material which he may have in his possession, which he thinks would be necessary for completing the investigation, and, if required, shall be heard by respondent No. 2. BILAL NAZKI, J. S.A. BOBDE, J.