Contractual ambulance drivers entitled to regular drivers’ minimum pay from 22 February 2021, Bombay High Court rules

The petitioners were engaged by the concerned Zilla Parishad as contractual ambulance drivers at Primary Health Centres in Pune.

They performed ambulance-driving duties for 24-hour shifts but were paid only approximately ₹8,000–₹11,000 per month, with payments allegedly made belatedly.

They sought payment at the minimum of the applicable regular pay scale for Class III ambulance drivers, together with arrears from the date of joining.

Several connected writ petitions raised the same claim, and the Court heard and disposed of them by a common judgment.

The respondents did not file affidavits in reply, principally because the issue had already been addressed in several binding or persuasive decisions.

Whether contractual ambulance drivers performing duties substantially similar to those performed by regular ambulance drivers are entitled to wages at the minimum of the applicable regular pay scale under the principle of “equal pay for equal work”.

Whether the petitioners were entitled to arrears of such wages from 22 February 2021, the date on which the Supreme Court dismissed the challenge to the decision in Dhiraj Wankhede, or from the date of joining, whichever was later.

Whether similarly situated contractual ambulance drivers who had not approached the Court should also receive the benefit of the settled legal position without being compelled to institute individual proceedings.

The Court applied the principle of “equal pay for equal work”, holding that an employee performing the same duties and bearing the same responsibilities cannot be paid less merely because of an artificial distinction in status or mode of engagement, as explained by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh, (2017) 1 SCC 148.

It relied on Dhiraj S/o Sudhakarrao Wankhede v. Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur, 2019 SCC OnLine Bom 13080, which directed payment to contractual ambulance drivers at the minimum of the regular drivers’ pay scale; the Supreme Court dismissed the challenge to that decision on 22 February 2021.

The same principle was reaffirmed in Nagendrayya P. Hiremath v. State of Maharashtra, 2020 SCC OnLine Bom 6920, Rajendra Kamble v. State of Maharashtra, W.P. No. 2012 of 2021, decided on 1 July 2021, and The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Solapur v. Ashok Dhondiba Meher, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1354.

The Court also relied on Navnath Bhaskar Dive v. State of Maharashtra, W.P. No. 1913 of 2024, decided on 30 August 2024, and State of Maharashtra through its Secretary v. Kamlesh Dhakal Thakhne, Civil Appeal No. 7288 of 2025, decided on 17 August 2026, affirming similar directions.

In relation to non-litigating employees, the Court applied the principle that similarly situated persons should receive the benefit of a declaration of law without being forced to file separate proceedings, relying on Inderpal Yadav v. Union of India, Lt. Col. Suprita Chandel v. Union of India, 2024 INSC 942, Amrit Lal Berry v. Collector of Central Excise, (1975) 4 SCC 714, and K.I. Shephard v. Union of India, (1987) 4 SCC 431.

The Court found that the petitioners were contractual ambulance drivers performing onerous public-health duties at Primary Health Centres, and that the respondents had not identified any legally sustainable distinction justifying payment below the minimum regular pay scale.

The decisions in Dhiraj Wankhede, Nagendrayya Hiremath, Ashok Dhondiba Meher and Kamlesh Dhakal Thakhne had repeatedly settled the entitlement of similarly situated contractual ambulance drivers to the minimum of the regular pay scale.

The Court held that continued refusal by the respondents, despite knowledge of this settled position, resulted in unjustified discrimination and compelled low-paid workers to engage in repeated litigation.

Since the Supreme Court had upheld Dhiraj Wankhede on 22 February 2021, the Court considered that date an appropriate point from which to grant arrears, subject to the alternative limitation that payment would begin from the date of joining where that date was later.

The Court also reiterated that the benefit should be extended to similarly situated contractual drivers who had not themselves litigated.

The respondents were directed to pay the petitioners wages at the minimum of the applicable regular pay scale for ambulance drivers.

Arrears were directed to be calculated from 22 February 2021 or the date of joining, whichever was later, and paid within three months of the judgment.

The Court reiterated that the benefit should be extended to all similarly situated contractual drivers and directed the Secretaries of the Health and Family Welfare and Rural Development Departments to circulate the judgment to all Zilla Parishads in Maharashtra with instructions to comply with the settled legal position.

No costs were awarded.