IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL, CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION LODGING NO.2455 OF 2006 PETITION LODGING NO.2455 OF 2006 PETITION LODGING NO.2455 OF 2006 Maharashtra Rajya Suraksha..Petitioner Rakshak & General Kamgar Union Vs. The Security Guards Board for Greater Mumbai & Thane District & Ors. ......Respondents Ms.Vaishali Bhilare, for the Petitioners Mr. M.S. Topkar, for Respondent No.1. Mr. Mangesh Patel, for respondent No.2. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: F.I. F.I. F.I. REBELLO REBELLO REBELLO & ANOOP ANOOP ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. V. MOHTA, JJ. V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE: DATE: DATE: 20TH OCTOBER,2006 20TH OCTOBER,2006 20TH OCTOBER,2006 P.C. . It is the case of the petitioners that that after this petition was filed respondent No.2 terminated the agency of respondent and appointed another agency. Consequent thereupon services of the guards listed at Annexure "A" have been terminated. The guards listed at Annexure "A" are no longer in service of respondent No.2. On behalf of respondent No.1 learned Counsel makes a statement that the respondent No.2 has not been registered under the Act. 2. Considering the above, we dispose of the petition by issuing the following directions:- (i) If the guards listed at Annexure "A" have already applied and if not applied they should do so within two weeks from today. The respondent No.1 within four weeks thereafter to consider the said application and pass appropriate orders in the matter of registering the guards listed at Exhibit "A" in accordance with law. (ii) If Respondent No.2 is not registered the respondent No.1 to take steps to launch prosecution against respondent No.2. . With the above directions, petition stands disposed of. (F.I. (F.I. (F.I. REBELLO, J) REBELLO, J) REBELLO, J) (ANOOP ANOOP ANOOP V. MOHTA,J). V. MOHTA,J). V. MOHTA,J).