1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 4891/2008. ( Mohanlal Sulodhia -: versus :- Union of India and others ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND F.M. REIS, JJ. DATED : OCTOBER 6, 2009. Heard Shri Mohanlal Sulodhia – petitioner inperson and Smt. S.W. Deshpande, learned counsel for respondents. After hearing the petitioner on first occasion on 24.11.2008 this Court gave leave to him to amend the petition to explain the latches and also to point out his entitlement. On 27.08.2009 this Bench heard the petition and again when the material on record was found to be lacking, we gave him one more opportunity to rectify the errors. At that time, we pointed out to him that major demand of grant of honourable jobs in executive posts to his son and daughter because of 55% disability were not being backed by any legal provision. We also noticed that the remedy of approaching Central Administrative Tribunal was available to him, but ultimately granted him time till 22.09.2009 to engage Advocate or then to take further appropriate steps. On 22.09.2009 we have heard the matter further and then found that he is also an Advocate. Again we granted time till today. 2 We find that the latches in the matter have not been explained and petitioner is not in a position to bring before us any legal provision to support his demand for grant of employment to his son or daughter. He has also prayed for compensation of Rs. 1,10,000000/- (Rs. One Hundred and Ten Millions) in prayer clause (7) of his petition. During hearing of the matter we noticed that he was requesting us to law down some new law which will be an example for others. He contends that, he has suffered lot and he has been victimized and discriminated by his superiors. He also attempted to point out that how there was discrimination in the matter of promotional reservations. Though all these aspects are not forming part of the petition, as we are disposing of the petition today we are recording the same. As already found by us, the petitioner has failed to explain latches in the matter and has also failed to make out any legal right so as to enable this Court to exercise its jurisdiction in his favour. In the circumstances, we have no option, but to dismiss the Writ Petition. Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. JUDGE JUDGE Rgd.