Vijay Laxman Gaikwad vs. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

Facts

Multiple writ petitions were filed by contractual ambulance drivers challenging the non-payment of their salaries for periods ranging from 12 to 15 months. The petitioners were engaged through contractors by Zilla Parishads. The State of Maharashtra, through the Joint Director of Health Services, had issued communications regarding the payment of salaries and the GST to be levied. The Zilla Parishads were asked to provide details of funds required for monthly salaries. The petitioners sought directions for the payment of their outstanding salaries and to continue their services. The Court considered communications from the State and the Zilla Parishads concerning the salary payments and the process of reimbursement.

Held

The Court held that the contractual ambulance drivers are entitled to receive their salaries directly from the Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad) or the State Government, vide bank transactions, to ensure timely payment, as contractors had failed to do so. The Court directed that the minimum pay scale at the lowest grade of regular employees holding the same post should be paid to the petitioners until further orders. Their services were to be continued, and termination was prohibited without leave of the Court, specifically concerning their contractual employment. The Court also directed the Zilla Parishads to intimate the quantum of unpaid salaries to the Joint Director of Health Services within 10 days and expected the Directorate of Health Services to initiate steps for payment from March 2023. The Court clarified that the State Government was not precluded from framing a scheme for regularization in light of the judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka v/s Umadevi (supra). The Court also directed that payments made directly to drivers would not be a ground for alleging a sham contract or establishing an employer-employee relationship with the Zilla Parishad or Principal Employer. The Court noted that if any drivers were terminated, they were at liberty to raise an industrial dispute. 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 receive their salaries directly from the Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad) in light of non-payment by contractors, and what is the quantum of arrears payable? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning principles of employment and contractual obligations). 2. Whether the services of the contractual ambulance drivers should be continued until further orders, and if so, under what conditions? (Question of law, concerning the continuation of contractual employment). 3. Whether the State Government is precluded from framing a scheme for regularization of services in light of previous judgments? (Question of law, concerning the applicability of precedents like Umadevi). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners argued for the direct payment of their salaries by the Zilla Parishads, citing non-payment by contractors and the State's communications. They sought continuation of their services and adherence to minimum pay scales. They relied on pronouncements regarding the payment of wages to contractual employees. Revenue/State's arguments: The State and Zilla Parishads, through their counsel, provided information regarding the process of salary payments, the need for fund allocation, and the GST implications. They indicated their willingness to facilitate payments and adjust amounts against contractor bills. They also referred to the communication dated 24.01.2023.