Sachin Pramod Thakre And Others vs. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary 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, including GST, and the need for Zilla Parishads to provide details of funds required for monthly salaries. The Zilla Parishads were directed to fill in a specific chart detailing unpaid salaries and submit it to the Joint Director of Health Services. The Court was also considering the issue of contractual employment and the potential for direct payment of salaries by the Principal Employer.

Held

The Court directed that the contractual ambulance drivers shall be paid salaries at the minimum pay scale of 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 concerned Zilla Parishads were directed to intimate the quantum of unpaid salaries to the Joint Director of Health Services within 10 days, using the format provided in a communication dated 24.01.2023. The Directorate of Health Services was expected to initiate immediate steps to ensure monthly salaries are paid from March 2023. The Court also directed that the Zilla Parishads or contractors must assess and make payments for arrears from the filing dates of the writ petitions, either in lump-sum or in twelve equated monthly installments. The service conditions of these petitioners would be maintained as long as the scheme lasts, and they shall not be replaced by new contractual employees, except in cases of misconduct, misdemeanor, death, or other valid reasons. The Principal Employer was directed to directly make payments to the drivers via bank transactions, which would not establish an employer-employee relationship with the Zilla Parishad or Principal Employer for the purpose of alleging a sham contract. Disengaged drivers were given liberty to raise industrial disputes. The Court noted that its conclusions in Dhiraj Sudhakarrao Wankhede would not prevent the State Government 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 unpaid salaries for the periods ranging between 12 to 15 months, and if so, from whom and how should these payments be made? 2. Whether the service conditions of these contractual employees should be maintained as long as the scheme lasts, and whether they can be replaced by new contractual employees? 3. Whether the Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad) should directly make payments to the contractual ambulance drivers, and if so, how this impacts the employer-employee relationship and the contracts with the agencies? Petitioner's arguments likely centered on their right to receive earned wages, the illegality of non-payment, and the responsibility of the Zilla Parishads and the State to ensure timely payment. They would have relied on principles of natural justice and labor laws. The Revenue/State's arguments would have focused on the contractual nature of the employment, the role of contractors, and the procedural aspects of salary disbursement, potentially referencing existing government communications and financial mechanisms.