Akshay Govind Jadhav vs. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

Facts

The petitioners are contractual ambulance drivers engaged through contractors by Zilla Parishads. They have not been paid 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 called upon to state the funds needed to pay monthly salaries directly. The Court is considering multiple writ petitions filed by these drivers challenging the non-payment of their salaries and seeking regularization of their services.

Held

The Court directed that the petitioners (contractual ambulance drivers) shall be paid the minimum pay scale at the lowest grade applicable to regular employees holding the same post until further orders. Their services shall not be terminated without leave of the Court, specifically concerning their contractual employment. The Court mandated that the concerned Zilla Parishads must fill in a specified chart with the quantum of unpaid salaries and submit it to the Joint Director of Health Services, Mumbai, 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 filing dates of the writ petitions and make payments, at least in twelve equated monthly installments. The Court further directed the Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad or Rugna Kalyan Samiti) to directly make payments to the contractual drivers via bank transfers, which would not establish an employer-employee relationship with the Zilla Parishad or Principal Employer. The judgment also clarified that contractual employees shall not be replaced by new contractual employees, with exceptions for misconduct, death, etc., and that preference may be given to previously engaged drivers if replacement is necessary. The Court also noted that the State Government could frame a scheme in view of the Supreme Court's judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka v/s Umadevi, if desired. The Court also directed that the Zilla Parishads or State Government 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 be paid minimum pay scales at the lowest grade of regular employees holding the same post until further orders? 2. Whether the services of the petitioners can be terminated without leave of the Court solely on the basis of their contractual employment? 3. Whether the Zilla Parishads should directly pay the salaries of these contractual drivers, and how should arrears be handled? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners argued for the payment of their outstanding salaries, for their services to be protected from termination without court leave, and for direct payment of salaries by the principal employer to avoid non-payment by contractors. They relied on various Supreme Court judgments concerning contractual employment and regularization. Revenue/State's arguments: The State acknowledged the issue of non-payment and issued communications to Zilla Parishads seeking details for resolution. The judgment indicates the State's involvement in facilitating the payment process.