4 It appears that in view of the agitation of the said 26 workers the Petitioner had filed a Civil Suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division at Khalapur, District Raigad. A perusal of the averments made in the said Civil Suit indicate that the Petitioner had accepted the fact that the Petitioner had engaged the workers through the contractor for carrying out the work of loading and unloading and housekeeping. The said statement which has been made in the said Civil Suit which has been filed in the year 2018, belies the case of the Petitioner that there is no Mathadi kind of work available with the Petitioner. The order passed by the Respondent No.1 Board is as indicated above passed on the material which has come before the Respondent No.1 Board on account of the inspections which were carried out on the dates which have been mentioned in the earlier part of this order. The record also discloses that the issue as regards the registration of the 26 workers was tried to be resolved by holding a number of meetings from the year 2005 to 2018 but to no avail. The act being a beneficial piece of legislation to protect the unprotected workers interference, if any, would have to be slow. It is impossible to believe that the Petitioner who is involved in manufacturing
