1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4336 OF 2009 J.B. Pagar and others .. Petitioners Vs General Manager - Bharat Electronics Ltd and another .. Respondents D.K. Ghaisas for the petitioners Meena H. Doshi for respondent no. 1 CORAM : Smt. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. DATE : 20th August, 2009 P.C.: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners employees and the learned counsel for respondent no. 1 company. 2. The petitioners represent 169 employees who are working in the respondent company. The main grievance of the petitioners is that there was discrimination and disparity in granting wages to them, hence reference was made by the Government of India to the Industrial Tribunal on the following issue : Rma wp4336-09.sxw 2 "Whether the action of the management of M/s. Bharat Electronics Ltd., Taloja in maintaining disparity and discrimination in granting wage group of Sh.J.B. Pagar and 169 others is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman concerned are entitled?" 3. The case of the petitioners is that they were not getting same benefits as other employees who are doing the same job and working in the same field and their wages have not been correctly fixed. 4.. In support of his case, petitioner no.1 has been examined. He has deposed on behalf of 169 employees who are interested and involved in issue referred in the dispute. His case is that discrimination is made by the company while granting wage group. In his cross-examination he has stated that he joined respondent company in 1988 and at that time wage group III was given to him. He has admitted in cross-examination that he has not complained about wage group III being granted to him. He admits that the Union had given letter dated 22nd May, 1989 for placing of all them in wage group IV instead of wage group III. He admits that Union had raised Rma wp4336-09.sxw 3 this issue before the Industrial Tribunal, Thane which was numbered as (IT) 21 of 1992 which was settled on 15th March, 1993. He admits that as per that settlement Wage Group IV was given to the concerned workmen w.e.f 1.1.1989. He further states that on that basis, two promotions were given to them. Similarly, Mr. Pagare has admitted that at no point of time, any objection was raised by any employee in respect of their wages. In his cross-examination, he has stated that like him Kanage and Gaikwad were appointed in Wage Group III. He admits that, at no point of time, any objection was raised by any of the employee in respect of their wage group. It was further his case that Wage Group IV was made applicable with effect from 1.1.1989 but he did not accept it. He further states that, however he accepted the said monetary benefits which were taken under protest. He admits that said under protest is not produced in the Court and he undertook to produce it. However, he has not produced it. It has come in the evidence of Mr.Pagare that grade is given on the basis of seniority of person in employment and the persons i.e Mr. Sawant and Mr. Shirgaonkar are possessing higher skill so they were given Wage Group IV. Rma wp4336-09.sxw 4 5. The petitioner's case is that employees involved in the reference are not getting benefit of Wage Group which is given to other employees doing similar work and working in the same department. However, it has come on record that the persons who are placed in higher wage group either have higher qualification or they were senior or they had more experience, in such case it has been rightly held by the Tribunal that no case of discrimination is made out. Looking to the evidence on record, no case is made out for interference in the order dated 4th December, 2008, hence the petition is dismissed. (SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J) Rma wp4336-09.sxw 5 Rma wp4336-09.sxw