Narendra Ramkrushna Dhandar vs. The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary And Ors

Facts

Multiple writ petitions were filed by contractual ambulance drivers challenging their termination and non-payment of salaries by Zilla Parishads and contractors. The petitioners had been engaged through contractors for ambulance services, and their contracts were terminated, leading to significant salary arrears, some spanning 12 to 15 months. The State of Maharashtra, through the Joint Director of Health Services, had issued communications regarding the payment of salaries and the inclusion of GST in salary details. The Zilla Parishads were directed to provide details of salaries payable, including GST, and the quantum of funds required for monthly payments. The Court was considering the issue of direct payment of salaries by the Zilla Parishads to the drivers, bypassing the contractors.

Held

The Court directed that the minimum pay scale at the lowest grade in the regular pay scale extended to regular employees holding the same ambulance driver post shall be paid to the petitioners until further orders. Their services shall not be terminated without leave of the Court, solely in relation to their contractual employment. The Zilla Parishads were directed to intimate the Joint Director of Health Services, Mumbai, the quantum of unpaid salaries within 10 days, and 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 must assess and pay arrears of payments from the filing of the writ petitions, either in lump sum or in twelve equated monthly installments. The service conditions applicable to the petitioners would be maintained as long as the scheme lasts, and contractual employees shall not be replaced by new contractual employees, with exceptions for misconduct or other valid reasons. The Court directed the Principal Employer to directly make payments to the contractual ambulance drivers via bank transactions, which would not be grounds for alleging a sham contract or establishing an employer-employee relationship with the Zilla Parishad. Petitioners terminated or disengaged were given liberty to raise industrial disputes. The Court noted that its conclusions in Dhiraj Sudhakarrao Wankhede would not impede the State Government from framing a scheme under Secretary, State of Karnataka v/s Umadevi. Finally, the Principal Employer was empowered to adjust these direct payments against contractor bills and service charges.

Key Issues

1. Whether the contractual ambulance drivers, engaged through contractors, are entitled to direct payment of their salaries by the Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad) in light of non-payment by contractors and termination of contracts? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning principles of employment and contractual obligations). 2. Whether the service conditions of these contractual employees should be maintained as long as the scheme lasts, and whether they should be protected from replacement by new contractual employees? (Question of law, concerning contractual rights and protection against arbitrary termination). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioners argued for direct payment of salaries by the Zilla Parishads, citing non-payment by contractors and the need to ensure their livelihood. They also sought protection against termination and replacement, emphasizing their continued service and the scheme's duration. They relied on principles laid down in cases like Ashok Dhondiba Meher and Vividh Kamgar Sabha. Revenue/State's Arguments: The State and Zilla Parishads were directed to provide details regarding salary payments and the quantum of funds required. The judgment indicates the State's involvement in facilitating salary payments and addressing the issue of unpaid wages, suggesting an acceptance of the need for intervention. Specific arguments from the revenue side regarding the GST component or other legal challenges are not explicitly detailed in the provided excerpt.