Santosh Sajjan Ghule vs. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

Facts

The petitioners, contractual ambulance drivers, filed multiple writ petitions challenging the non-payment of their salaries for periods ranging between 12 to 15 months. They were engaged through contractors by Zilla Parishads. The State of Maharashtra, through the Joint Director of Health Services, issued a communication on January 24, 2023, requesting Zilla Parishads to submit details of salaries payable, including GST, and the quantum of funds required for monthly payments. The Zilla Parishads were directed to fill a specific format/chart and submit it within 10 days. The Court noted that contractors had deployed these drivers, but their contracts were terminated, and their further bills would not be cleared without court leave. The Agency (Zilla Parishad or Contractor) was to assess arrears from the petition filing dates and make payments, possibly in installments.

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 not to be terminated without leave of the Court, solely concerning their contractual employment. The concerned Zilla Parishads were directed to intimate the Joint Director of Health Services, Mumbai, about the quantum of unpaid salaries within 10 days, using the chart annexed to the communication dated January 24, 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 Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad or Contractor) would have to make the assessment of arrears from the petition filing dates and make payments, at least in twelve equated monthly installments. The service conditions applicable to the petitioners would be maintained as long as the scheme lasts, and contractual employees would 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 contractual ambulance drivers via bank transactions, which would not establish an employer-employee relationship with the Zilla Parishad or Principal Employer. The Court also noted that the conclusions in Dhiraj Sudhakarrao Wankhede would not impede 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 salaries directly from the Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad) or the State Government, considering the non-payment by contractors? Petitioner's contention: The petitioners argued that despite working for extended periods, their salaries were not paid by the contractors, necessitating direct intervention by the authorities. They relied on principles laid down by the Supreme Court regarding payment of wages to contractual employees. Revenue/State's contention: The State and Zilla Parishads were directed to provide details and assess the quantum of unpaid salaries. The judgment implies the State acknowledged the issue and initiated steps for resolution, including the provision of a format for salary details and GST implications. The State's specific legal arguments regarding direct payment or the extent of their liability were not explicitly detailed in the provided excerpt, but they were involved in the process of rectifying the non-payment.