1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 5645 OF 2004 Rashtravadi Suraksha Rakshak and General Kamgar Union .. Petitioner. vs. The Security Guards Board for Greater Bombay and Thane District & Ors. .. Respondents. Mr. Susheel Mahadeshwar for petitioner. Ms. Lata Desai for R.No. 1. Mr. Indra Mokashi i/by Ajay Mishra & Co. for R. No. 3. CORAM : A.P. SHAH & S.U. KAMDAR, JJ. DATE : 29th September,2004 P.C. . Heard counsel appearing for respondent nos. 1 and 3. 2. Para 5 of our order dated 3.8.2004 be substituted by the following para. 2 "5. The respondent no. 2 who is the principal employer is absent despite service. It appears that the respondent no. 2 is not registered with the respondent no. 1 Board as per the scheme. The guards engaged by the respondent no. 2 through respondent no. 3 are also not exempted from the operation of the security guards scheme. It is therefore clear that the respondent no. 2 is not entitled to engage security guards through any private security guard agency." 3. We direct the respondent no. 2 to get itself registered with the Security Guards Board within a period of four weeks from today.