V.R. Kingaonkar, J.

Both these petitions are being disposed of together in as much as they arise out of same judgments rendered by the Labour Court in Complaint (ULP) No. 125/1994 and by the Industrial Court in Revision (ULP) No. 18/1997 and Revision (ULP) No. 19/1997. By the impugned judgments, the learned Judge of the Labour Court held that the employer committed unfair labour practice under Item 1 (g) of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short, "the MRTU & PULP Act"). The employee was, therefore, directed to be reinstated in service with continuity and without back wages. The revision petition preferred by the employer against the said Judgment due to the relief so granted by the Labour Court and the revision petition preferred by the employee against the order of dismissal of his claim for back wages came to be dismissed by common judgment rendered in both revision petitions, by the learned Member, Industrial Court, Ahmednagar.

2. For sake of convenience, the employer will be referred hereinafter as "the Sugar Factory" and the employee will be referred hereinafter by his first name "Dashra