Shivaji Vitthal Jagtap vs. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

Facts

These writ petitions were filed by ambulance drivers who were engaged through contractors and whose services were terminated. The petitioners claimed non-payment of salaries for periods ranging from 12 to 15 months. The State of Maharashtra, through the Directorate of Health Services, issued a communication on January 24, 2023, to District Health Officers of Zilla Parishads, requesting details of salaries payable to contractual drivers and providing a format that included GST. The Zilla Parishads were asked to state the funds required for monthly salaries. The Court noted that the contractors had deployed these petitioners, and their contracts had been terminated. The petitions also involved contempt petitions related to earlier orders.

Held

The Court directed that the minimum pay scale at the lowest grade applicable to regular employees holding the same post should be paid to the petitioners until further orders. Their services were not to be terminated without leave of the Court, solely in relation to their contractual employment. The Court noted that the petitioners had not been paid salaries for 12 to 15 months. In light of the State's communication dated January 24, 2023, the concerned Zilla Parishads were directed to intimate the Joint Director of Health Services, Mumbai, about the quantum of unpaid salaries within 10 days, using the chart annexed to the communication. The Directorate of Health Services was expected to initiate steps to ensure monthly salaries are paid from March 2023. The Court also directed that the Zilla Parishad or Contractor would have to assess arrears from the dates of filing of the writ petitions and make payments, if not in lump sum, then in twelve equated monthly installments. The Court explicitly stated that the payment of salaries directly by the Principal Employer would not be a ground for alleging a sham contract or establishing an employer-employee relationship with the Zilla Parishad or Principal Employer. The Court also noted that if contractual ambulance drivers were terminated or disengaged, they were at liberty to raise an industrial dispute. The Court also clarified that its conclusions in a previous case (Dhiraj Sudhakarrao Wankhede) would not prevent the State Government from framing a scheme in view of the judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka v/s Umadevi.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Zilla Parishads, as principal employers, are liable to directly pay the salaries of the contractual ambulance drivers, considering the termination of contracts with the deploying agencies and the non-payment of wages for extended periods, and if so, how should the GST component be handled in such direct payments? (This issue is implied by the court's directions regarding direct payment and the mention of GST in the State's communication). Contentions: Petitioner/Appellant: Argued for direct payment of salaries by the principal employer due to non-payment by contractors and termination of services. They sought relief for unpaid wages. Revenue/State: The State of Maharashtra, through its communication dated January 24, 2023, indicated a process for Zilla Parishads to submit details of salaries payable, including GST, suggesting an acknowledgment of the financial implications and a potential mechanism for addressing the issue. The State's involvement implies a recognition of the need for resolution.