Ganesh Achyutrao Dhavale And Others vs. The Union Of INDIA Through Its Secretary And Others

Facts

A group of ambulance drivers, employed through contractors, filed multiple writ petitions challenging the non-payment of their 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 contractual drivers, including GST. The Zilla Parishads were asked to specify the funds required for monthly salaries. The petitioners sought directions for payment of their arrears and regular salaries. The Court considered the communication from the Directorate of Health Services and the plight of the drivers.

Held

The Court directed that the Petitioners be paid their salaries at par with the minimum pay scale of regular employees holding the same post until further orders. Their services were also protected from termination without leave of the Court. The Court noted that the Petitioners had not been paid salaries for 12 to 15 months. In light of the State's communication dated January 24, 2023, the concerned Zilla Parishads were directed to submit details of unpaid salaries to the Joint Director of Health Services within 10 days. The Directorate of Health Services was expected to initiate steps to ensure monthly salaries are paid from March 2023. The Court also directed that arrears of payments be made, if not in lump sum, then in twelve equated monthly installments. The Principal Employer was directed to directly make payments to the contractual drivers via bank transactions, which would be adjusted against contractor bills. The Court also clarified that the State Government could frame a scheme in view of the Supreme Court judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka v/s Umadevi, and that contractual employees should not be replaced by new contractual employees, with exceptions for misconduct or other valid reasons. The Court also permitted disengaged drivers to raise industrial disputes.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioners are entitled to receive their unpaid salaries and future salaries directly from the Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad/State) given the non-payment by contractors? The Petitioners argued that due to the non-payment of salaries by the contractors, they are facing severe financial hardship and are entitled to direct payment from the Principal Employer, citing the principle of ensuring wages are paid. They also contended that their services should not be terminated without leave of the court. The Revenue (State) did not appear to have made specific arguments on this point in the provided text, but their actions indicated a move towards direct payment. 2. What is the appropriate mechanism for payment of salaries and arrears to the contractual ambulance drivers? The Court had to determine how the unpaid salaries and future emoluments should be disbursed, considering the existing contractual arrangements and the alleged failures of contractors.