Raju Laxman Sapkale And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

Facts

These writ petitions were filed by contractual ambulance drivers engaged through contractors by various 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 previously communicated with Zilla Parishads regarding the payment of salaries, including GST, and requested details of funds required. The Zilla Parishads were called upon to provide information on the quantum of funds needed for monthly salaries. The petitioners sought directions for the payment of their outstanding salaries and for their services not to be terminated without court leave.

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 also protected from termination without leave of the Court, specifically concerning their contractual employment. The Court acknowledged the non-payment of salaries for extended periods and directed the concerned Zilla Parishads to intimate the Joint Director of Health Services, Mumbai, about the quantum of unpaid salaries within ten days. 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 would have to make an assessment of arrears from the dates of filing the writ petitions and make payments, either in lump-sum or in twelve equated monthly installments. The Court also directed the Principal Employer to directly make payments to the contractual ambulance 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 noted that if any contractual drivers were terminated or disengaged, they were at liberty to raise an industrial dispute. The Court also clarified that its directions would not prevent the State Government from framing a scheme in accordance with the Supreme Court's judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka v/s Umadevi.

Key Issues

1. Whether the contractual ambulance drivers, engaged through contractors by Zilla Parishads, are entitled to receive their salaries directly from the Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad) in light of non-payment by contractors? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners contended that due to the non-payment of salaries by the contractors, they were facing severe financial hardship. They relied on principles laid down by the Supreme Court regarding payment of wages to contractual employees. They sought direct payment from the Zilla Parishads to ensure they received their rightful remuneration. Revenue/State's arguments: The State, through its communications, acknowledged the issue of salary payments and the inclusion of GST. The Zilla Parishads were directed to provide details of funds required for salaries. The State's stance was to facilitate the payment process, acknowledging the contractual framework but also the need for drivers to be paid. No specific arguments against direct payment were recorded, but the process of fund allocation and payment was emphasized.