Lalan Kishor Singh v. The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Industries, Enrgy And Labour Dept., Mumbai And ORS.

2026:BHC-NAG:3657-DB 126-WP-1670-2026.odt 1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 1670 OF 2026 LALAN KISHOR SINGH Vs.

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES, ENERGY AND LABOUR DEPT., MUMBAI AND ORS.

__________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Mr. R. S. Bhure, Advocate for the Petitioner. Ms T. H. Khan, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2/State. CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ. DATE : 4 th MARCH, 2026.

1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:

a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, directing to conduct immediate the Respondents inspections of all companies in Hingna Industrial Area, Nagpur, to verify compliance with the Maharashtra Private Security Guards Act, Minimum Wages Act, and other labour laws;

b) Direct the Respondents to ensure registration of all security guard contractors and establishments, enforce minimum wages (not less than prescribed rates), limit

126-WP-1670-2026.odt 2/3 working hours to 8 per day with overtime pay, and provide statutory leaves and benefits to all security guards;

c) Direct Respondent No. 2 (Labour Commissioner) to initiate proceedings against violating companies and contractors, including penalties under the relevant Acts; d) Direct the Respondents to furnish a detailed report on actions taken within a time-bound period, say 3 months, and monitor compliance;

e) Award costs of this petition to the Petitioner; f) Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice."

3.

The perusal of the aforesaid prayer clauses reveal that they pertain to the rights of the private security guards working in various establishments and infringement of such rights. However, the present petitioner in para 1 has revealed that the petitioner is a social worker and RTI activist. However, the present petitioner has nowhere stated in the present writ petition that he is one of the private security guards whose rights have been infringed and hence, has approached this Court.

126-WP-1670-2026.odt 3/3 4.

Thus, the present petition filed at the behest of an individual who is not an aggrieved person at the hands of the respondents is definitely without any locus and is accordingly dismissed on the ground of locus standi.

(RAJ D. WAKODE, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.) MJ Jadhav