1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1454 OF 2010 Ahmednagar District Labour Contractor Society's Cooperative Federation Limited .. petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra and others. .. Respondent. --- Mr. V.D. Hon, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. P.P. More, AGP for the respondents. CORAM : A.P. DESHPANDE & N.D. DESHPANDE,JJ. DATE : 18th FEBRUARY, 2010. ORAL ORDER :- 1] The petitioner is a federal Cooperative society, duly registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act. The petitioner claims to be a federation of the District Labour Contractor Society, Ahmednagar. The petition questions the constitution of a Committee named as “Works Distribution Committee” under Government Resolution dated 8/5/2007 issued 2 by the Rural Development and Water Conservation Department, State of Maharashtra. According to Shri Hon, learned counsel for the petitioner, there is already a Works Distribution Committee in existence which has been set up by the Government vide Circular dated 3/7/1979. The said committee comprises of 5 members viz. Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Executive Engineer, PWD, Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Representatives of Labor Cooperative Societies and the District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies. However, as per the Govt. Resolution dated 8th May, 2007, the allocation of work under the Zilla Parishad is to be regulated in the manner laid down in the said Govt. Resolution. The objection of the petitioner is only to the constitution/composition of the Works Distribution Committee. It is submitted that all the members of the Works Distribution Committee comprises of Officers only of the Zilla Parishad and thus, only those contractors, who are near and dear to the Zilla Parishad, would be allotted the work. 3] We do not see any merit in the submission. In the first place, all the members of the said committee are not persons from Zilla Parishad. The committee comprises of Superintending 3 Engineer of the “Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojna”. It does appear from the inclusion of names of the Head of the Offices in the committee, that the said composition cannot be objected to, on legitimate grounds. 4] The petition being devoid of any merit, the same is summarily dismissed. [N.D. DESHPANDE,J.] [A.P. DESHPANDE.J.] Grt/-