:1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT CONTEMPT CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 9 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 9 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 9 OF 2008 IN IN IN WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 2534 OF 2007 PETITION NO. 2534 OF 2007 PETITION NO. 2534 OF 2007 Maharashtra Rajya Suraksha Rakshak And General Kamgar Union. ... Petitioners. V/s. The Security Guards Board for Greater, Mumbai & Thane District & Ors. ... Respondents. Ms. Vaishali Bhilare for the Petitioner. Ms. Lata Desai i/b. Pallavi Divekar for Respondents 1 & 2. Mr. P.M. Mokashi for Respondent 3. ..... CORAM CORAM CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. 24TH 24TH 24TH MARCH 2009. MARCH 2009. MARCH 2009. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . In pursuance of the last order, an affidavit of the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, who was the then Chairman of the Board is filed and it is stated that the Board has formulated a detailed procedure for Registering the Security Guards. My attention is invited to paragraph 4 of this affidavit and the criteria evolved on 19th June 2006 for registering the Security Guards. My attention is invited to the two Government Resolutions/Orders and it is contended that the Security Guards have to fulfil the conditions of educational qualification, physical fitness and bring certificates demonstrating attendance, earning of salary and other details. :2: 2. My attention is also invited by parties to certain orders of the Division Bench giving directions for periodical visits by the Inspectors so as to scrutinize the records of the principal employers. My attention is also invited to the decision taken by the Advisory Committee on 6th June 2007 which was communicated to the Board on 16th November 2007. 3. Mrs. Desai pointed out the entire procedure is explained in paragraphs 6 to 8 of the affidavit in reply. 4. She has, then, invited my attention to the order disposing of 25 Writ Petitions involving about 400 Security Guards and contended that there is some backlog at the end of the Board but the Board has taken prompt steps to clear the same. Since the procedure contemplates furnishing of certain certificates by the Security Guards, it is not as if the registration is not effected merely because the Board has not taken any steps or that there is any inaction on the part of the Board in this case. Her contention is that no general presumption be drawn that merely because there is a delay, the Board has not taken any steps or has failed to comply with the orders of the Court. Similarly, depending upon the facts of each case, it must be concluded as to whether the violation or disobedience is willful or not. 5. Having perused the Petition and the affidavits :3: filed on record, I am of the view that in the facts peculiar to this case, it cannot be said that a Civil Contempt has been committed. There does not appear to be any deliberate or willful disobedience to the orders and directions of this Court. The procedure for registration of the Guards has been explained elaborately and it is stated that within the period of six weeks from the date of the order, the Board had taken the necessary steps to implement the same but the Security Guards in this case reported in November 2007 and thereafter, the process commenced. 6. In the light of the above, no case for Civil Contempt is made out and the Contempt Petition is, therefore, dismissed. 7. However, after perusing the affidavit in reply with the assistance of Ms. Desai, what I find is that there is always a communication gap and after the Security Guards approach the Board either individually or collectively, their applications are taken on file and the steps for scrutinizing them further are not taken promptly. In some cases therefore, the Security Guards Unions are compelled to approach the Court of law and obtain peremptory directions to have the Guards registered. All these entails in further complicating the matters as in addition to the pending applications, the Court orders have to be implemented. The Board can avoid all this by adopting a :4: practical and pragmatic approach. The Board is set up under a Welfare Enactment and in pursuance of a Welfare Scheme. The Welfare and Beneficial legislation must be implemented so as to fulfil the object and purpose of enacting it. In these circumstances, the Board would be well advised if after receipt of the applications, it gives them serial numbers and also gives a Tentative Date for scrutiny of the applications. The Board must immediately scrutinize them but if they maintain a proper record of the applications and give them serial numbers, they would be assisting the Security Guards and avoid complaints of discrimination and favouritism. If the applications are numbered serially and the details entered in a proper Register which is open for Scrutiny and Inspection, then, all charges of Arbitrariness and Discrimination so also Delay, Favouritism and Nepotism/Corruption can be avoided. Similarly, if tentative date of scrutiny is given which should be such as would give sufficient time for the Applicant to produce the necessary certificates and documents, then, the Applicant would not be required to come again and again to the Office of the Board for making Enquiries. If the date and number is given and the Applicant is told to attend on that date and time, the Board can avoid rush of the Applicants. The details of the applications, the scrutiny undertaken and the status/position monthwise can be also indicated by the Board on the Notice Board so also by publishing an advertisement in the Local Newspaper. All :5: these steps including placing the details on the Website of the Board or the concerned Department of the State Government i.e. The Department of Labour and Industry and more particularly, the Website of the Commissioner of Labour, Government of Maharashtra should be taken if not, initiated already. If such steps are taken promptly, then, I have no doubt in my mind that the rate of litigation will come down and there will be transparency in the working of the system. The Security Guards will have an assurance that their applications made to an Agency set up under a Welfare Legislation will receive due attention. The Agency must take necessary efforts to assist them in securing an Employment. 8. I hope and trust that if the steps indicated above in addition to those set out in the affidavit of the Board would go in a long way in assisting and helping the Applicants in securing Employment. Last but not the least, I hope that this Court would not be required to issue any further show cause notices. This should be the last occasion and the Board need not await show cause notice from this Court for implementing the orders passed by this Court. The orders must be implemented before any Contempt Petition is filed or the Union or the Security Guards are compelled to bring to the notice of the Court the violation committed by the Board. Needless to therefore add that the State Government must also take :6: such steps as are necessary and for expeditious implementation of the orders of this Court, it must issue such directions as are permissible in law including taking disciplinary action against defaulting Officers of the Board so that a full proof and complete mechanism can be evolved for welfare of Security Guards. 9. Petition dismissed subject to above. No costs. (S.C. (S.C. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.)