Dadasaheb Jaywantrao Giddhe vs. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

Facts

The petitioners are contractual ambulance drivers engaged through contractors by various Zilla Parishads. They have not been paid their salaries for periods ranging from 12 to 15 months. The State of Maharashtra, through the Joint Director of Health Services, issued a communication on January 24, 2023, requesting Zilla Parishads to submit details of salaries payable, including GST, and the quantum of funds required for monthly payments. The Zilla Parishads were asked to fill a specific format/chart and submit it within 10 days. The Court was considering multiple writ petitions filed by these drivers challenging the non-payment of their salaries and seeking regularization of their services. The judgment also notes that the contractors who deployed these petitioners have had their contracts terminated.

Held

The Court directed that the contractual ambulance drivers shall be paid minimum pay scales at the lowest grade of the regular pay scale until further orders. Their services shall not be terminated without the leave of the Court, solely in relation to their contractual employment. The Court noted that the petitioners have not been paid salaries for periods ranging between 12 to 15 months. It directed the concerned Zilla Parishads to intimate the Joint Director of Health Services, Mumbai, about the quantum of unpaid salaries, filling the chart annexed to the communication dated January 24, 2023, within 10 days. The Directorate of Health Services was expected to initiate immediate steps to ensure monthly salaries are paid from March 2023. The Court also directed that the Zilla Parishads or contractors must assess arrears from the dates of filing of the writ petitions and make payments, either lump-sum or in twelve equated monthly installments. The Court further directed that the Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad or Rugna Kalyan Samiti) shall directly make payments to the contractual ambulance drivers via bank transactions, which would not establish an employer-employee relationship for the purpose of deeming the contract sham. The Court clarified that if any contractual drivers were terminated or disengaged, they could raise an industrial dispute. The Court also held that its previous conclusions in Dhiraj Sudhakarrao Wankhede would not prevent the State Government from framing a scheme under the judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka v/s Umadevi, if desired. Finally, the Court directed that the Principal Employer could adjust these direct payments against the bills of the contractors and service charges.

Key Issues

1. Whether the contractual ambulance drivers are entitled to receive their minimum salaries at the lowest grade of the regular pay scale until further orders, considering their prolonged non-payment of wages? 2. Whether the services of these contractual drivers can be terminated without the leave of the Court, given their contractual employment status and the circumstances of non-payment? 3. Whether the Zilla Parishads, as principal employers, are obligated to directly pay the salaries of these contractual drivers, especially in light of contractors not paying wages? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners argued that they have not been paid for extended periods and are facing financial hardship. They sought directions for the payment of their salaries and for their services not to be terminated arbitrarily. They relied on principles of natural justice and relevant Supreme Court judgments concerning contractual employment and wage payments. Revenue/State's arguments: The State and Zilla Parishads acknowledged the issue of non-payment and provided a communication outlining a process for addressing it. They indicated a willingness to ensure payments are made, subject to procedural requirements and the availability of funds. They also pointed to the contractual nature of the employment and the termination of contractor agreements.