Pravin Vijay Umale And Ors vs. The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary And Ors

Facts

Multiple writ petitions were filed by contractual ambulance drivers against the State of Maharashtra and its various departments, including Zilla Parishads. The petitioners alleged non-payment of salaries for periods ranging from 12 to 15 months. The core issue revolved around the termination of contracts with agencies that had deployed these drivers, leading to a lack of salary disbursement. The State, through communications from the Joint Director of Health Services, acknowledged the issue and requested details from Zilla Parishads regarding unpaid salaries and required funds. The court was also informed of a communication dated 24.01.2023 from the Joint Director to District Health Officers concerning the payment of salaries.

Held

The Court partly allowed the writ petitions with several directions. It 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. The services of the petitioners were also protected from termination without leave of the Court, specifically concerning their contractual employment. The Court mandated that Zilla Parishads would intimate the Joint Director of Health Services about the quantum of unpaid salaries within 10 days, using a specified format. The Directorate of Health Services was expected to initiate steps to ensure monthly salaries are paid from March 2023. Furthermore, the Court directed the Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad or Contractor) to make payments of arrears, if not in lump sum, then in twelve equated monthly installments. The Court also held that the Principal Employer would directly make payments to the contractual ambulance drivers via bank transactions, and this would not establish an employer-employee relationship with the Zilla Parishad or Principal Employer. The Court also clarified that its directions would not impede the State Government from framing a scheme under the judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka v/s Umadevi, and that the Principal Employer could adjust these direct payments against contractor bills 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 the contractors, and what is the appropriate mechanism for such payment? Petitioner's contention: The petitioners argued that they have not been paid their salaries for extended periods and sought directions for direct payment by the Principal Employer to ensure they receive their dues. They relied on principles of natural justice and established labor jurisprudence concerning the payment of wages to contractual employees. Revenue's contention: The State acknowledged the issue of non-payment and indicated a willingness to facilitate payments, as evidenced by communications from the Joint Director of Health Services. The State's stance suggested a procedural approach to address the salary arrears and future payments, including the submission of required details and formats for fund allocation.