CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Vs. VAIJINATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all these writ petitions the issue involved is identical. Therefore, all these petitions have been heard together and the same are being disposed of by this common judgment. All these petitions take exception to the judgments and orders delivered on 22nd and 23.9.2011 by the learned Member, Industrial Court, Latur in Complaints (ULP) No. 22, 26, 27, 25, 24, and 23 of 2008.

(2.) THE relevant facts, as narrated in the complaints, are thus: The respondent No. 1 herein are the original complainants before the Industrial Court. They filed the complaints stating therein that the complainants are working as a Clerk since 15.9.2001, 1.11.1988, 1.1.1997, 1.6.1989, 31.12.1998, and 1.10.2000, respectively in the office of the present petitioner-original respondent No. 1 and respondent

(3.) THE complainants submitted that there are many employees working as Group Secretary and getting salary in the pay scale of Rs. 4,000-6,000. The respondents therein are asking the complainants to do the work of Group Secretary, and there is no difference in the work done by the complainants and the other Group Secretary, and in spite of this,respondents are not paying the complainants same salary, respondents therein have committed breach of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. The respondents societies have requirement of Group Secretaroes and saidposts are vacant and resolution is also passed but, respondents society had not absorbed the complainants permanently on the posts of Group Secretary. Other clerks Gyanba Nagesh Hadge and Sudhir Ramchandra Puranik were also directed to be absorbed permanently on the posts of Group Secretary by making resolution No. 4 and the respondent societies had absorbed the particular persons in their favour only and committed unfair labour practice as per item No. 5. The complainants therefore, filed the complaints praying permanency on the posts of Group Secretary and consequential benefits.