1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR . WRIT PETITION NO.325 OF 2010. RASHTRIYA KOYALA KAMGAR SANGHARSH SANSTHARAVINDRA VS REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER, NAGPUR AND OTHERS ______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Shri B. M. Khan, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri S. K. Mishra, Asstt. Solicitor General of India for the respondent no.1. Shri M. Anilkumar, Advocate for the respondents no.2 & 3. Shri K. K. Pathak, Advocate for the respondents no.4,6 & 7. Shri S. M. Puranik, Advocate for Respondent no.5. CORAM : A.H. JOSHI AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. DATE : 9th MARCH, 2010. 1. The petitioner Union has filed the present writ petition mainly against the respondent no.2. 2. Petitioner challenges respondent no.2's letters dated 6-11-2009 and 12-12-2009. 3. The petitioner claims a mandamus that in the process of verification of membership of Trade Unions 2 enjoying check off facility, the verification of membership of petitioner as well be done. 4. The petition contains statement which reads as follows : “The respondent no.2 takes steps to verify membership of the Labour Unions for giving them representations on various committees on regional level. [Quoted from page of petition paper book] 5. In the course of hearing, the Advocate of the petitioner was called upon to specify the Committees in relation to whose nomination the membership is being verified and to demonstrate whether these Committees are statutory. 6. It is brought to the notice of the Court by the respondent and is not denied by the petitioner that :- (a) The petitioner Union was registered in April 2009. (b) The membership of the Union for the period of one year would be seen for representation. (c) Sporadic membership is not to be seen. 3 7. At this stage, the learned Advocate Mr. Khan states that the Committees under Chapter IV B of Mines Rules 1955 and under Rule 69 are being constituted. This oral submission does not have any foundation of documents filed on record. 8. For seeking right of mandamus any writ party has to show a legal right and corresponding obligation. 9. In the admitted background that the petitioners Union is less than one year old and that the process of selection or election to any statutory Committee is not demonstrated. 10. The petitioner has failed to demonstrate any legal right, and therefore, the petition does not call for any indulgence. Hence, the petition is dismissed. Judge Judge //mule// 4