JUDGMENT :

M.G. Gaikwad, J.—Heard learned advocates for respective parties. With consent of parties, appeals are heard and finally decided at the stage of admission.

2. These appeals are directed against a common judgment in Writ Petitions No. 854/2003 and 925/2003 whereby the learned single Judge by his judgment dated March 6, 2007 allowed both the writ petitions and set aside the order passed by learned Industrial Court Jalgaon in Complaint ULP No. 482/1999. In the original complaint, the press is respondent No. 1 and the newspaper is respondent No. 2. Hence in the judgment we are going to refer the press and paper as respondent No. 1 and respondent No. 2 respectively, although they are recited in different order in the two appeals.

3. The appellant Union filed Complaint u/s 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 in industrial Court at Nasik alleging unfair labour practices. The Complaint came to be filed through one S.N. Patil, General Secretary of the complainant Union. The unfair labour practice alleged was under Item 9 of Schedule IV. Respondents 1 and 2 in the complaint are alleged to be different divisions of one e