1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the respondent.

2. Both these petitioners are challenging the order passed by the Tribunal holding that the reference which is made by the Government is maintainable. Brief facts which are relevant for the purpose of deciding these petitions are as under :-

3. The petitioner in Writ Petition (Lodging) No.474/2007 transferred its company to the petitioner in Writ Petition No.534/2007 Bon factory, Mumbai, by a deed of transfer and in the terms of settlement which was arrived between the parties, it was agreed that the workmen who were working with Hindustan Lever Ltd. in the said factory would be given an option to join services of Bon Limited. Pursuant to the said option which is given, all the workmen except 47 workmen had given their option and were transferred to the company Bon Limited with effect from 17.7.2005.

4. Thereafter, the petitioner company Bon Limited made an application to the Competent Authority under Section 25-O of the Act seeking permission to close down the Bombay factory. This application was rejected by the Competent Authority on 16.3.2006. Thereafter, the petitioner company made an application for review of the said order as per provisions of Section 25-O(5). The Competent Authority allowed the review application and granted permission to the company for closure of its industrial establishment i.e. Bombay factory situated at Haji Bunder Road, Sewri, Mumbai. Thereafter, on 27.7.2006, the workmen of Bon Limited filed an application before the Competent Authority seeking a reference of the matter concerning the closure of its unit. Thereafter, the Union addressed a letter to the appropriate Government and the Competent Authority and made a prayer for reference. In the meantime, the Union representing the workmen challenged the order of closure and also the order dated 26.7.2006 by the appropriate authority and filed the writ petition vide Writ Petition No.2056/2006.

5. In the said writ petition, this Court passed an order directing the Competent Authority to refer the matter to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication under Section 10(1) read with Section 25-O(5) of the Act. The learned Single Judge of this Court also granted liberty to the petitioner company to challenge the maintainability of the reference which was in the Industrial Court.

6. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition, the appropriate Government made a reference and referred the matter to the Tribunal.

7. The petitioner company challenged this order which was passed by this Court in SLP No.1566/2006 before the Apex Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court was pleased to dispose of the SLP with the following directions :- "We make it clear that the Tribunal should decide the question as to whether the reference is maintainable in the first instance as a preliminary issue preferably on or before 31st January, 2007."

8. Thereafter both the parties filed their respective submissions and after hearing both the sides, Tribunal by order dated 25.1.2007 held that the reference was maintainable. The petitioner in Writ Petition No.534/2007 is challenging the said order of the Tribunal dated 25.1.2007 wherein it was held that the reference is maintainable. The petitioner Hindustan Lever Ltd. in Writ Petition (Lodging) No.474/2007 has filed this petition seeking a direction from this Court directing the Tribunal to consider its application for withdrawal of the notice which was issued to the petitioner Hindustan Lever Ltd. and also deletion of Hindustan Lever Ltd. from array of parties as it was not proper and necessary party since Bombay factory had already been transferred to Bon Limited.

9. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted the petitioner raises several important questions of law by general public importance. He submitted that this issue which was sought to be raised by the petitioner was not decided by the Divisio