1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2862 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO.2862 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO.2862 OF 2005 Maharashtra Suraksha Rakshak Aghadi .. Petitioners vs. The Security Guards Board for Gr.Bombay and Thane Dist.& Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Susheel Mahadeshwar for the petitioners Mr.M.S.Topkar for respondent nos.1 Mr.P.K.Samdhani, Sr.Advocate with Mr.K.G.Munshi i/b M/s.Udwadia & Udeshi for respondent nos.2 CORAM: J.N. PATEL & CORAM: J.N. PATEL & CORAM: J.N. PATEL & K.K. TATED, JJ K.K. TATED, JJ K.K. TATED, JJ DATE: 21ST JULY, 2008 DATE: 21ST JULY, 2008 DATE: 21ST JULY, 2008 P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners’ grievance would stand resolved, if they are permitted to apply to the board constituted under section 6 of the Maharashtra Private Security Guards (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1981 for the purpose of registration of the members of the petitioner union as Security Guards and that on such application being made, the board would take a decision in the matter within a stipulated period so fixed by the court. 2 3. We do not find such an order in the nature of direction cannot be made in the matter, as it does not prejudice the parties, on the other hand, the petitioners can very well agitate their rights if any, flowing from such registration. 4. We, therefore, dispose of this petition with liberty to the petitioner union to file an application before the board in respect of the Security Guards who are their members and who are specified in Exhibit - A annexed to the petition within a period of two weeks from the date of this order. On such application being made, the board would after hearing the necessary parties, take a decision in the matter within a period of 8 weeks. We expect that the board would pass a speaking order and deal with the application by following the principles of natural justice and dispose of the application in accordance with the rules. 5. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. In view of the fact that this court has disposed of the petition, all interim orders passed by this court stand vacated. (J.N. PATEL, J. ) (J.N. PATEL, J. ) (J.N. PATEL, J. ) 3 (K.K. TATED, J. ) (K.K. TATED, J. ) (K.K. TATED, J. )