Mustafa Shamshoddin Birajadar And Others vs. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

Facts

Multiple writ petitions were filed by contractual ambulance drivers challenging termination of their services and non-payment of salaries by Zilla Parishads and contractors. The petitioners had been engaged through contractors for ambulance services under various schemes. They alleged non-payment of salaries for periods ranging from 12 to 15 months and sought continuation of their employment. The State of Maharashtra, through the Joint Director of Health Services, had issued communications regarding the payment of salaries and the quantum of funds required. The petitions were heard together by the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad.

Held

The Court partly allowed the writ petitions. It directed that the contractual ambulance drivers shall be paid minimum pay scale at the lowest grade of regular employees holding the same post until further orders. Their services were not to be terminated without leave of the Court, solely based on their contractual employment. The Court directed the concerned Zilla Parishads to intimate the Joint Director of Health Services about the quantum of unpaid salaries within 10 days. The Directorate of Health Services was expected to initiate steps for payment of monthly salaries from March 2023. The Court also directed that the Zilla Parishads or contractors must make payments of arrears, if not in lump sum, then in twelve equated monthly installments. The service conditions were to be maintained as long as the scheme lasts, and contractual employees were not to be replaced by new contractual employees, except in cases of misconduct, misdemeanor, death, or similar reasons. The Court directed the Principal Employer (Zilla Parishad) to directly make payments to the drivers via bank transfers, clarifying this would not establish an employer-employee relationship with the Zilla Parishad. It was also noted that the State Government could frame a scheme in view of the Supreme Court's judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka v/s Umadevi, if desired. The Court also clarified that the Principal Employer could adjust these direct payments against the bills of the contractors.

Key Issues

1. Whether the contractual ambulance drivers are entitled to continued employment and payment of arrears of salary, considering their engagement through contractors and the termination of contracts. (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning principles of contract labour and employment rights). 2. Whether the Zilla Parishads, as principal employers, are obligated to directly pay the salaries of these contractual drivers, especially in light of non-payment by contractors. (Question of law, concerning employer's responsibility and statutory obligations). Petitioner's arguments likely centered on the principle of "equal pay for equal work" and the need for direct payment to prevent exploitation by contractors, citing relevant Supreme Court judgments on contract labour and regularization. The Revenue/State's arguments would likely focus on the contractual nature of the employment, the role of contractors, and the financial implications for the Zilla Parishads, potentially referencing the scheme under which the drivers were employed and the limitations of contractual employment.