1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1592 OF 1999 ... Asanghathit Kamgar Andalon and others ...Petitioners v/s The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents ... Mr.S.K.Singhvi with Ms.Jove Cox for the Petitioners. Ms.Madhubala Kajale, AGP for the State. Mr.S.C.Pal for the Union of India. ... CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH, & R.G.KETKAR, JJ DATED: 15th September, 2009 P.C.: 1. By this petition the Petitioners challenge the notification dated 22nd July, 1998 fixing the minimus wages under the Minimum Wages Act purported to have been issued in exercise of the power conferred by 2 clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 3 read with sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (IX of 1948). So far as the Petitioner No.1 is concerned, it is unregistered body comprising of various registered trade-unions. Though it is not registered under any Act, it claims to be the association of the registered Trade-Unions. In our opinion, as the Petitioner No.1 is not a person in the eye of law, therefore the Petition filed by Petitioner No.1 cannot be entertained. So far as Petitioners Nos.2, 3 & 4 are concerned, they are Trade Unions registered under the Trade Union Act. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners Nos.2, 3 and 4 states that the Petitioners has not raised objections, which were called for by the Authorities, before issuing the notification. 3 2. In our opinion, the object of the requirement of inviting the objections to the proposed action is that the persons who are likely to be affected by the notification can get an opportunity to put forth their point of view before the Authority and the authority gets an opportunity to consider the point of view of the persons in relation to whom the action is proposed to be taken. The Petitioners before challenging the action in a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India either have to raise an objection or have to explain what prevented them from raising the objections. In our opinion, entertaining a petition at the instance of the Petitioners who do not raise any objection before the authority and also give no explanation in the petition as to why the objection was not raised, will not be 4 proper exercise of the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Petition, therefore, fails and is dismissed. Rule discharged. No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (R.G.KETKAR, J.)