( 1 ) IN both these appeals, the appellants, original petitioners, have challenged the validity of a common judgment delivered in Special Civil applications Nos. 3931 and 3667 of 2004 dated 21st july, 2004. In view of the said fact, at the request of the learned advocates, both the appeals have been heard together.

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to the said petitions, in a nutshell, are as under:- (1) The original petitioners were working under bahucharaji Mataji Temple Trust, respondent No. 2 herein in different capacities like peons and watchmen. Respondent No. 2-Trust wanted to reorganize its activities and, therefore, it retrenched the petitioners and other similarly situated persons, by orders dated 23rd March, 2004 upon payment of retrenchment compensation as per the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the ID Act ). It was specifically stated in the retrenchment orders that the provisions of the ID Act were not applicable to the Trust, but for sake of abundant caution, the trust had paid retrenchment compensation to the petitioners. The said orders were challenged in the aforesaid writ petitions, which have been rejected,