Kantilal Fulsing Mote And Another vs. The Union Of INDIA Through The Secretary And Others

Facts

These writ petitions involve contractual ambulance drivers engaged through contractors or Zilla Parishads, who have not been paid 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, directing Zilla Parishads to submit details of salaries payable to these drivers, including GST, and the quantum of funds required. The petitioners are seeking direct payment of their salaries and regularization of their services. The court is addressing the issue of unpaid wages and the contractual employment of these drivers.

Held

The Court held that the contractual ambulance drivers are entitled to receive their salaries directly from the Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad or State Government) to ensure payment, as contractors have failed to do so. The Court directed that the minimum pay scale at the lowest grade of regular employees holding the same post shall be paid to the petitioners until further orders. Their services shall not be terminated without the leave of the Court, specifically concerning their contractual employment. The Court also clarified that the State Government is not precluded from framing a scheme for these drivers, referencing the judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka v/s Umadevi. The Court directed the Zilla Parishads to directly pay the salaries of these contractual ambulance drivers via bank transactions, which can be adjusted against contractor bills and service charges. The Court also directed that contractual employees shall not be replaced by new contractual employees, with exceptions for misconduct or other valid reasons, and that preference may be given to previously engaged drivers if replacements are necessary. The Court also noted that if any contractual drivers have been terminated, they are at liberty to raise an industrial dispute.

Key Issues

1. Whether the contractual ambulance drivers are entitled to receive their salaries directly from the Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad or State Government) given the non-payment by contractors? 2. Whether the services of these contractual ambulance drivers should be protected from termination without leave of the Court? 3. Whether the State Government is precluded from framing a scheme for these drivers in light of previous judgments? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners contend that they have not been paid for extended periods and that the State's communication indicates an intention to address this. They seek direct payment to ensure they receive their dues and protection against arbitrary termination. They rely on principles of ensuring fair wages and the State's role in providing essential services. Revenue/State's arguments: The judgment does not explicitly record arguments from the revenue or state on these specific issues. However, the State's communication dated January 24, 2023, suggests a willingness to facilitate salary payments and gather details for the same.