Firoz Khan Afzal Khan vs. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

Facts

Multiple writ petitions were filed by contractual ambulance drivers engaged through contractors by Zilla Parishads in Maharashtra. The petitioners alleged non-payment of salaries for periods ranging from 12 to 15 months. The State of Maharashtra, through the Joint Director of Health Services, had issued a communication on January 24, 2023, requesting Zilla Parishads to provide details of salaries payable, including GST, and the quantum of funds required. The Zilla Parishads were asked to submit a specific format/chart to the Joint Director. The petitions also involved issues related to the termination of services and the payment of salaries directly by the Zilla Parishads or the Principal Employer, bypassing the contractors.

Held

The Court directed that the petitioners (contractual ambulance drivers) shall be paid the minimum pay scale at the lowest grade in the regular pay scale extended to regular employees holding the same post, until further orders. Their services shall not be terminated without leave of the Court, solely in relation to their contractual employment. The Court also directed the concerned Zilla Parishads to intimate the Joint Director of Health Services, Mumbai, regarding the quantum of unpaid salaries within 10 days, using the chart annexed to the communication dated January 24, 2023. The Directorate of Health Services was expected to initiate steps to ensure monthly salaries are paid from March 2023. The Court further directed that the Zilla Parishad or Contractor must assess arrears from the filing dates of the writ petitions and make payments, if not in lump sum, then in twelve equated monthly installments. The Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad or Rugna Kalyan Samiti) was directed to directly make payments to the drivers via bank transactions, which would not be a ground for alleging a sham contract or establishing an employer-employee relationship with the Zilla Parishad. The Court also clarified that contractual employees shall not be replaced by new contractual employees, with exceptions for misconduct, etc., and that preference should be given to previously engaged drivers if replacement is necessary. The Court noted that its conclusions in Dhiraj Sudhakarrao Wankhede would not prevent the State from framing a scheme under the judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka v/s Umadevi.

Key Issues

1. Whether the contractual ambulance drivers are entitled to receive their minimum salaries at the lowest grade of the regular pay scale applicable to regular employees holding the same post, pending further orders in their writ petitions? 2. Whether the services of the petitioners can be terminated without leave of the Court, solely in relation to their contractual employment? 3. Whether the Zilla Parishads, as Principal Employers, should directly pay the salaries of the contractual ambulance drivers, and how these payments should be adjusted against contractor bills? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners contended that they have not been paid salaries for extended periods and sought directions for payment of minimum wages and protection against termination. They relied on various Supreme Court judgments concerning contractual employment and payment of wages. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not explicitly record arguments from the revenue or state in response to the specific legal questions raised by the petitioners. However, the State's communication dated January 24, 2023, indicates an attempt to address the salary payment issue by seeking details from Zilla Parishads.