JUDGMENT :

Patel J.

1. The Petition is filed by a Federation of Retail Traders Welfare Association and an individual. It seeks to challenge Rule 35 of the Maharashtra Shops and Establishments (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Rules 2018 framed under the Maharashtra Shops and Establishment (Regulation of Employment and Condition of Service) Act, 2017. The Petition says that this Rule is ultra vires Articles 13, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(g) and, for some reason that we cannot readily appreciate, Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Then there is a prayer for a mandamus without a preceding demand for justice, although this has long been settled to be essential before a mandamus can be sought, to restrain Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 from taking any steps to implement the Rule. Respondent No.1 is the State of Maharashtra and the Respondent No.2 is the Mumbai Municipal Corporation.

2. It seems now to have become a habit in this Court to seek the high prerogative remedy of a mandamus without averring that the petitioner has made a demand for justice but this has been denied; or even making a demand at all, let alone explaining how the case fits in the few limited and well-known exc