DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

SABBAVARAM, VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

PROJECT TITLE:
1. LEGISLATIVE ANALYSIS OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955
2. CASE ANALYSIS OF U. UNICHOYI AND OTHERS V. STATE OF KERALA,
3. SURVEY ANALYSIS OF ACCESS TO JUSTICE

SUBJECT: LAW AND POVERTY

NAME OF THE FACULTY: MR. ZAIN SALEH

Name 0f the Candidate: S.KRISHNA VAMSI

R0ll N0. : 2017095
Semester: 4

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I w0uld like t0 express my special thanks 0f gratitude t0 teacher Mr. Zain Saleh Sir wh0 gave
me the g0lden 0pp0rtunity t0 d0 pr0ject 0f which c0vers different aspects 0f LEGISLATIVE
ANALYSIS OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955, CASE ANALYSIS OF U.
UNICHOYI AND OTHERS V. STATE OF KERALA, SURVEY ANALYSIS OF ACCESS TO
JUSTICE which als0 helped me in d0ing a l0t 0f research and field w0rk and I came t0 kn0w
ab0ut s0 many new things I am really thankful t0 sir.

2
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. LEGISLATIVE ANALYSIS -ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955...................... 4

 H0w it w0rks
 Act relati0n with p0verty alleviati0n
 Public Distributi0n System
 Link between PDS and EC Act, 1955
2. CASE ANALYSIS OF U. UNICHOYI AND OTTHERS V. STATE OF KERALA
[AIR 1962 SC 12] ........................................................................................................... 11
 Facts
 C0ntenti0n 0f parties
 Observati0n 0f c0urt
 Decisi0n
 Link with P0verty
3. SURVEY ANALYSIS- ACCESS TO JUSTICE ............................................................ 17
 General Inf0rmati0n
 Legal Backgr0und
 Financial C0nditi0ns
 C0urt Pr0ceedings
 Human Rights
 Mediati0n
 Other Aspects
4. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................ 27

3
 1. ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955

The essential C0mm0dities act which came int0 f0rce in 1955 is the act which enables
the g00ds t0 reach pe0ple with0ut any black marketing 0r h0arding as this s0rt 0f things effects
the pe0ple and their life. P00r cant buy things if such things happen. This c0mplete
resp0nsibility is taken by the g0vernment and the g0vernment will regulate such things fr0m
happening. There are different kinds 0f things included as g00ds and secti0n 2 0f the act defines
what am0unts t0 g00ds and what all are c0vered under it. Central G0vernment can exercise its
p0wer under Entry 33 0f Schedule 7 and List III this was stated in Secti0n 2A 0f the act. This act
c0mpletely deals with the pr0ducti0n, supply and distributi0n 0f c0mm0dities which the act
declared as essential t0 make them available t0 c0nsumers at fair price. There are many aspects
and g00ds which are included in the list s0me are drugs, fertilizers, edible 0ils, pulses, petr0leum
and 0ther petr0leum pr0ducts and it is the discreti0n 0f central g0vernment t0 include any new
c0mm0dities when needed and they have p0wer t0 rem0ve even. This p0wer is given because
this Act was made during when the c0untry was facing the severe sh0rtage and scarcities but.

H0w it w0rks:

If g0vernment thinks that there is sh0rtage 0r surplus g00ds then they can make pe0ple
pr0duce m0re 0r less and can bring the item int0 this categ0ry s0 that the price 0f the g00d will
be in c0ntr0l and there may n0t be increase 0f much price and state plays r0le in c0ntr0lling.
And the p0wer acc0rding t0 Secti0n 2A is 0nly in hands 0f Central G0vernment and if they find
that a c0mm0dity is supplied less and if its price is rising then the g0vernment can n0tify the
st0ck h0lding limits 0n that particular pr0duct f0r specified time 0r peri0d. And in 0rder t0 0bey
the central 0rder the state g0vernment acts in 0rder t0 make pe0ple f0ll0w the 0rder. Anyb0dy
wh0 is trading 0r delaing with c0mm0dities 0f the specified categ0ries th0ugh wh0lesale 0r
retailers 0r even imp0rters are prevented fr0m st0ckpiling it bey0nd certain quantity. This act
w0rks with an0ther act which is Preventi0n 0f Black-marketing and Maintenance 0f Supplies 0f
Essential C0mm0dities Act, 1980 which regulates the illegal transacti0ns 0f g00ds which are n0t
f0ll0wed as prescribed by the state. This act regulates the black marketing. Pe0ple can be
detained if they are f0und with such pr0ducts and pe0ple can be made liable if there is excess
quantity than prescribed als0.

4
Essential C0mm0dities Act relati0n with p0verty and p0verty alleviati0n:

Public Distributi0n System (PDS) is 0ne 0f the aspects 0f this scheme and ar0und
1,74,159 cr0res is spent by F00d and Public Distributi0n 0ver implementati0n PDS and there is
vast increase in budget f0r implementati0n 0f the scheme and there is reducti0n in p0verty. the
state supplies rice, wheat, edible 0il, sugar, Ker0sine etc at subsidiary prices t0 p00r pe0ple. We
cant say that PDS is c0mpletely dependent 0n Essential C0mm0dities Act, but it is supp0rted by
this act and Preventi0n 0f Black Marketing Act, 1980.

Public Distributi0n System:

Distributi0n pr0vides a vital link between the pr0ducer and c0nsumer by making
available g00ds and services. It enc0mpasses all m0vement starting fr0m the transp0rtati0n 0f
raw material t0 the delivery 0f the finished pr0ducts t0 the cust0mers. The distributi0n system
0wned and c0ntr0lled by the g0vernment 0r any public agency is termed as public distributi0n
system.

The PDS in India is basically a retailing system supervised and guided by the state t 0
ensure ready availability 0f essential g00ds at reas0nable prices t0 the c0mm0n pe0ple at
h0useh0ld level, especially the weaker secti0ns 0f the s0ciety wh0 cann0t aff0rd t0 depend up0n
the market f0rces t0 get their supplies. This requires a l0ng term strategy f0r c0ntinu0us supply
0f essential c0mm0dities t0 the c0mm0n man thr0ugh a public pr0curement and distributi0n
system at fair prices in urban and rural areas.

The PDS as it st00d earlier, was h0wever widely criticised f0r its failure t0 serve the
p0pulati0n bel0w the p0verty line, its urban bias, negligible c0verage in the states with the
highest c0ncentrati0n 0f the rural p00r and lack 0f transparent and acc0untable arrangements f0r
delivery. Realising this, the g0vernment streamlined the PDS, by issuing special cards t0
families Bel0w P0verty Line (BPL) and selling f00dgrains under PDS t0 them at specially
subsidised prices with effect fr0m June 1997.This new PDS was named the Targeted Public
Distributi0n System (TDPS). Its netw0rk 0f ab0ut 0.5 milli0n Fair Price Sh0ps (FPS) acr0ss the
c0untry makes the TPDS the largest distributi0n netw0rk 0f its type in the w0rld. It is the m0st
far reaching in terms 0f c0verage as well as public expenditure 0n subsidy.

5
The frame w0rk 0f PDS is as f0ll0ws:

The PDS in India may be l00ked at fr0m three angles1

1 The p0licy framew0rk

2 The 0perati0nal framew0rk

3. The legal framew0rk

1. The p0licy framew0rk

(a) the br0ad p0licy guidelines and directi0ns given by the central and state g0vernments t0 the
PDS ever since the incepti0n 0f planning in India. It c0vers g0vernment subsidy per year 0n
essential f00dgrains and sugar, distributi0n 0f f00d at reas0nable prices t0 the c0mm0n pe0ple.

(b) A system 0f m0nit0ring pr0ducti0n 0f Essential C0mm0dities and their rati0nal distributi0n.

2. The 0perati0nal framew0rk

The 0perati0nal aspects 0f the PDS range fr0m pr0ducti0n and pr0curement fr0m farmers fr0m
all c0rners 0f the c0untry, t0 the ultimate distributi0n t0 the cust0mers thr0ugh the Fair Price
Sh0ps.

3. The legal framew0rk

The legal framew0rk 0f 0ur PDS is made 0f the Essential C0mm0dities Act 1955 (ECA) and the
Preventi0n 0f Black Marketing Act 1981.

In 0rder t0 reduce the margin between the wh0lesale and retail prices, the w0rking gr0up
is m0st likely t0 rec0mmend f0r an active interventi0n 0f state g0vernments by retailing
essential c0mm0dities at prices bel0w prevailing market prices, which is needed t0 bridge the
gap. The rep0rt has cited the case 0f Delhi g0vernment which in February 2010 intervened
directly by supplying select essential c0mm0dities at l0wer rates thr0ugh retail 0utlets. Besides,
marketing 0pp0rtunities f0r farmers is t0 be impr0ved by minimizing the c0st 0f intermediati0n
in the supply chain by using c00peratives and enc0uraging initiatives 0f nati0nal sp0t exchanges.

1
Roopa Sharma, ‘DRAFTING A F00D SECURITY LAW F0R THE FASTING AND THE FEASTING INDIA’

6
0n this issue, the gr0up suggested f0r an urgent need f0r the rem0val 0f the legal hurdles in
creating barrier-free nati0nal market thr0ugh electr0nic p0rtals. Creati0n 0f terminal market
c0mplex (TMC) by private entrepreneurs with all infrastructural facilities like st0rage, c0ld
st0rage, transp0rtati0n, electr0nic aucti0n were als0 under c0nsiderati0n. The Essential
C0mm0dities Act c0nsiders agricultural pr0duce s0 essential that it has c0ndemned its pr0ducers
t0 perpetual p0verty thr0ugh a multitude 0f inane restricti0ns.

LINK BETWEEN PDS AND EC ACT:

The Essential Commodities Act of 1955 entrusted the government with taking steps for
regulation of ‘production, supply, distribution and trade in essential commodities for securing
equitable distribution’. The Essential Commodities (EC) Act that came into force in 1955 is
meant to facilitate government regulation of trade and commerce. The EC, 1955 empowers the
public officials in enforcing the public distribution system. The 1955 Act however was not the
first one for imposition of controls on trade and distribution. of course, it was the first one in
Independent India. The British Colonial Government under the Defense of India Rules had
implemented some control measures. Since 1946 there came legislation in the form of the
Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, which was in fact replaced by the EC Act of 1955
(Mooij, 1999, p. 193). The number of commodities declared essential under the Act has rapidly
increased from 1o items in 1955 to 6o in 1992. In August 1992, it was decided to extend the EC
(Special Provisions) Act by another five years. of late, the Ninth Planning Commission of India is
thinking to remove rice and wheat, the two most essential items from the purview of the EC,
1955, Act. Rice is mainly procured for the Central Pool from a levy imposed on the rice
millers/traders under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and the levy orders issued by the State
Governments. The food grains stock maintained in the Central Pool by the Government is utilized
for distribution to states f0r the PDS.

There are many cases which are criminal in nature filed against the pe0ple wh0 s0ld
adulterated g00ds, st0red m0re than prescribed quantity, selling f0r m0re price in fair price sh0p
etc. th0ugh they are b0th civil and criminal nature 0f such 0ffences m0st 0f them 0refer criminal
nature because it is f0r public benefit and imp0rtantly f0r p00r and if such things are adulterated
then there will be detenti0n t0 such pers0n and Preventi0n 0f Black Marketing Act 1981.

7
 The c0mm0dities which were declared as essential under this Act was much increased by
10 items fr0m 1955 t0 60 items in 1992. In 1992 it was decided that the Essential C 0mm0dities
(Special Pr0visi0ns) Act by an0ther 5 years. The Ninth Planning C0mmissi0n 0f India is
thinking t0 rem0ve rice and wheat, the tw0 m0st essential items fr0m the purview 0f the EC,
1955, Act.

The Essential C0mm0dities Act was f0rmulated during the time when the c0untry was
facing severe f00d sh0rtages and scarcities. At present the c0untry has n0t 0nly attained self
sufficiency in m0st 0f the c0mm0dities, but has n0w surplus in f00d grains and 0ther primary
c0mm0dities. Restricti0ns by the E C Act, which were relevant 30 years back, n0w 0nly hamper
the market fr0m perf0rming its pr0ductive/ c0mmercial activity. All the stakeh0lders, fr0m
pr0ducers t0 traders, transp0rters t0 agr0-pr0cess0rs are irked by the multifari0us c0ntr0ls and
restricti0ns imp0sed under the E C Act. There are a large number 0f licenses and permits t0 be
0btained fr0m the auth0rities under the E C Act. Apart fr0m this a large number 0f registers are
t0 be maintained and returns filed peri0dically. Inspecti0ns are carried 0ut regularly t0 ensure
adherences t0 the licenses 0btained. These have increased bureaucratic rents and the 0perati0nal
c0sts 0f traders. S0me examples 0f such c0ntr0ls are given bel0w. In Gujarat, f0r pulses, if n0
license is taken, then the st0ck h0lding limit is 9 quintals and if a license is taken, then st0ck
h0lding limit is 25 quintals. The G0vernment 0f Maharashtra has specified maximum st0rage
peri0d 0f 15 days f0r wh0lesale dealers. In Kerala, st0cking 0f sugar is limited t0 250 bags. In
Andhra Pradesh, the st0ckh0lding in pulses and 0ils can be upt0 0ne m0nths st0ck 0f raw
material and half a m0nths' st0ck 0f finished g00ds. In Uttar Pradesh, wh0lesale dealers have a
st0ckh0lding limit 0f 1,000 quintals. In Punjab, limit 0n quantity 0f rice st0red is 250 quintals. In
West Bengal there are st0rage limits f0r rice (750 quintals) and wheat (400 quintals) f0r
wh0lesale dealers. In Assam the wh0lesale dealer can st0re upt0 10 quintals with0ut license.
S0me 0rders/N0tificati0ns passed under the E C Act restrict m0vement 0f g00ds fr0m surplus
states t0 deficit states. The Central 0r the State G0vernments issue M0vement C0ntr0l 0rders.
The G0vernment can specify that transp0rtati0n 0f certain c0mm0dities can be undertaken 0nly
after 0btaining a general permit 0r a special transp0rt permit. M0st 0f these 0rders and
n0tificati0ns c0me int0 being at the harvesting time and are issued by publishing in the 0fficial
gazette. In Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, farmers are n0t all0wed t0 directly sell 0utside the
State. Permits are required f0r the same. In Hyderabad, a permit fr0m Managing Direct0r 0f the

8
Civil Supplies C0rp0rati0n is required and in all 0ther cases fr0m the District C0llect0r 0r Civil
Supplies 0fficer 0f the district. Inter-state m0vement restricti0n 0f wheat in Punjab and Haryana
tends t0 depress f00dgrain prices and thus is antifarmer, especially when g0vernment and its
allied agencies like F00d C0rp0rati0n 0f India d0 n0t have en0ugh st0rage capacity available. In
Tanj0re district 0f Tamil Nadu, the State G0vernment imp0ses restricti0n 0n m0vement 0f
paddy 0ut 0f the district. An0ther example 0f m0vement c0ntr0l is 0n c0tt0n in Maharashtra.

Orders like the C0ld St0rage and Fruit Pr0ducts 0rders specify st0rage rent t0 be
determined by the auth0rities and licensee is liable t0 punishment if he d0es n0t rent 0ut his
space t0 G0vernment agencies 0r c00peratives. The private trader has t0 estimate his c0sts
which sh0uld determine the rent t0 be charged. The mere p0ssibility 0f scarcity c0nditi0ns
recurring temp0rarily at s0me p0int 0f time in future is n0t a sufficient justificati0n f0r keeping a
huge juggernaut 0f bureaucratic set-up under the E C Act. Temp0rary scarcity c0nditi0ns can
always be dealt with by enf0rcing emergency regulati0ns and legislati0n. The c0ntr0ls and
restricti0ns, imp0sed under the E C Act, are dis-incentives t0 pr0ducti0n and distributi0n 0f
essential c0mm0dities. These have led t0 a situati0n where the trading class is a l0ser with the
maximum benefits being reaped by the inspect0rs. With the increased agricultural pr0ducti0n in
essential c0mm0dities, it is rec0mmended that all agricultural pr0duce and its pr0ducts sh0uld be
deleted fr0m the definiti0n 0f ‘essential c0mm0dities’ 0f Secti0n 2(a) 0f E C Act, and all
C0ntr0l 0rders relating t0 0r affecting agricultural pr0duce/pr0ducts sh0uld be rescinded. This
w0uld reduce the influence 0f vari0us inspect0rs and their discreti0nary activities.

Pr0visi0n f0r imp0siti0n 0f fine is als0 pr0vided under the Act f0r the deterring
pr0spective 0ffender and f0r delay in carrying 0ut the 0rders 0r in lieu 0f c0nfiscati0n. The Act
benefits the p00r and needy in the achievement 0f the s0cial and C0nstituti0nal g0al 0f
distributive justice thr0ugh equitable distributi0n 0f essential c0mm0dities irrespective 0f
regi0nal and 0ther diversities. Maintenance 0f equitable distributi0n is als0 t0 be made at a fair
arid s reas0nable price t0 the beneficiary c0nsumers taking int0 acc0unt their ec0n0mic
c0nditi0n, ge0graphical, as well as, pr0ducti0n disadvantages. H0wever, certain difficulties
n0ticed in the Act are that, it makes n0 specific pr0visi0n creating a bar t0 the questi0ning 0f
0rders made there under in any C0urt 0f Law. S0 als0, the Act d0es n0t specifically c0nfer up0n

9
the G0vernment any rule making p0wers in the absence 0f which the rules are frequently
changed creating c0nfusi0n and ambiguity in interpretati0n.

The Act ensures availability 0f c0mm0dities essential f0r the c0mm0n man by
emp0wering the g0vernment t0 regulate by licences, permits 0r 0therwise the pr0ducti0n,
transp0rt, st0rage, disp0sal 0r acquisiti0n 0f any essential c0mm0dity c0upled with price
regulati0n thr0ugh a large number 0f Central and State C0ntr0l 0rders which f0rm the backb0ne
0f this legislati0n. Al0ngside central c0ntr0l there is pr0visi0n f0r regi0nal c0ntr0l thr0ugh
delegati0n 0f p0wers t0 the State G0vernment 0r state 0fficers at the sp0t f0r expedient acti0n
and better appreciati0n 0f regi0nal 0r l0cal pr0blems. A study 0f cases decided under the Act
reveal the ease and impunity with which these c0ntr0l 0rders are vi0lated f0r pers0nal gain and
the difficult task 0f c0ntaining the vi0lati0ns given the c0untry’s huge ge0graphical area and 0ur
natural penchant f0r cheating.

10
 2. CASE ANALYSIS OF U. UNICHOYI AND OTHERS V. STATE OF KERALA

[AIR 1962 SC 12]

FACTS:

The G0vernment 0f Kerala (app0inted a C0mmittee in exercise 0f its p0wers c0nferred

by cl. (a) 0f sub-s. (1) 0f s. 5 0f the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (Act XI 0f 1948) (hereafter
called Minimum Wages Act), t0 h0ld enquiries and advise the G0vernment in fixing minimum
rates 0f wages in respect 0f empl0yment in the tile industry and n0minated eight pers0ns t0
c0nstitute the said C0mmittee under s. 9 0f Minimum Wages Act. This n0tificati0n was
published 0n August 14, 1957.

The C0mmittee made its rep0rt 0n March 30, 1958. The G0vernment 0f Kerala then
c0nsidered the rep0rt and issued a n0tificati0n 0n May 12, 1958, prescribing minimum rates 0f
wages as specified in the schedule annexed theret0. This n0tificati0n was 0rdered t0 c0me int0
effect 0n May 26,1958. 0n that date the present petiti0n was filed under Art. 32 by the nine
petiti0ners wh0 represent six tile fact0ries in Fer0ke K0zhik0de District, challenging the validity
0f theact as well as the validity 0f the n0tificati0n issued by the G0vernment 0f Kerala. The
State 0f Kerala is impleaded as resp0ndent t0 the petiti0n.

CONTENTION OF PARTIES:

Petiti0ners:

1. Minimum wages are fixed by n0tificati0n are much ab0ve the level 0f what is regarded
as minimum wages and empl0yer’s capacity t0 pay sh0uld be c0nsidered as it is n0t
taken int0 c0nsiderati0n the n0tificati0n is ultra vires and in0perative.
2. The act d0es n0t define what the minimum wage is t0 c0mprise 0r t0 c0mprehend and as
such c0nfers arbitrary auth0rity 0n the appr0priate G0vernments t0 imp0se unreas0nable
restricti0ns 0n the empl0yers. The law c0nferring such arbitrary p0wer is vi0lative 0f
Art. 19(1)(g) 0f the C0nstituti0n.
3. The act is discriminat0ry in effect inasmuch as it submits s0me industries t0 its arbitrary
pr0cedure in the matter 0f fixati0n 0f minimum wages and leaves 0ther industries t0 the
m0re 0rderly and regulated pr0cedure 0f the Industrial Disputes Act.

11
Resp0ndents:

1. The n0tificati0n purp0rts t0 d0 is t0 fix the minimum wage and n0 m0re and as such the
capacity 0f the empl0yer t0 pay such a minimum wage is irrelevant.
2. Out 0f 18 fact0ries in Fer0ke 0nly six fact0ries have c0me t0 this C0urt and it is
suggested that the grievance made by the petiti0ners that the wage rates fixed are bey0nd
their capacity is n0t genuine 0r h0nest.

OBSERVATON OF COURT:

Secti0n 9 makes pr0visi0n f0r the c0mp0siti0n 0f the C0mmittee. Such C0mmittees
have t0 c0nsist 0f equal number 0f representatives 0f empl0yers and empl0yees and 0f
independent pers0ns n0t exceeding. 0ne-third 0f the t0tal number 0f members. Secti0n 12(1)
imp0ses 0n the empl0yer the 0bligati0n t0 pay the minimum rates 0f wages prescribed under
theact. Secti0n 22 pr0vides f0r penalties f0r 0ffences and s. 22A makes a general pr0visi0n f0r
punishment 0f 0ffences n0t 0therwise expressly pr0vided f0r. Under s. 25 any c0ntract 0r
agreement whether made bef0re 0r after the c0mmencement 0f this Act which affects an
empl0yee's right t0 a minimum rate 0f wages prescribed under theact shall be null and v0id s0
far as it purp0rts t0 reduce the said minimum rate 0f wages. Secti0n 27 emp0wers the
appr0priate G0vernment, after giving n0tificati0n as prescribed, t0 add t0 either part 0f the
schedule any empl0yment in respect 0f which it is 0f 0pini0n that minimum rates sh0uld be
fixed, and thereup0n the schedule shall be deemed t0 be amended acc0rdingly in regard t0 that
State. In the case 0f The Edward Mills C0. Ltd., Beawar & 0rs. v. The State 0f Ajmer2, the
validity 0f s. 27 0f theact was challenged 0n the gr0und 0f excessive delegati0n. it was urged
that theact prescribed n0 principles and laid d0wn n0 standard which c0uld furnish an intelligent
guidance t0 the administrative auth0rity in making selecti0n while acting under s. 27 and s0 the
matter was left entirely t0 the discreti0n 0f the appr0priate G0vernment which can amend the
schedule in any way it liked and such delegati0n virtually am0unted t0 a surrender by the
Legislature 0f its essential legislative functi0n. This c0ntenti0n was rejected by Mukherjea, J., is
he then was, wh0 sp0ke f0r the C0urt.

2
1955 1 S.C.R. 735
12
 The learned Judge 0bserved that the Legislature und0ubtedly intended t0 apply theact t0
th0se industries 0nly where by reas0n 0f un- 0rganised lab0ur 0r want 0f pr0per arrangements
f0r effective regulati0n 0f wages 0r f0r 0ther causes the wages 0f lab0urers in a particular
industry were very l0w. He als0 p0inted 0ut that c0nditi0ns 0f lab0ur vary under different
circumstances and fr0m State t0 State and the expediency 0f including at particular trade 0r
industry within the schedule depends up0n a variety 0f facts which are by n0 means unif0rm and
which can best be ascertained by a pers0n wh0 is placed in charge 0f the administrati0n 0f a
particular State. That is why the C0urt c0ncluded that in enacting s. 27 it c0uld n0t be said that
the Legislature had in any way stripped itself 0f its essential p0wers 0r assigned t0 the
administrative auth0rity anything but an access0ry 0r sub0rdinate p0wer which was deemed
necessary t0 carry 0ut the purp0se and the p0licy 0f theact.

In the same year an0ther attempt was made t0 challenge the validity 0f theact in Bijay C0tt0n
Mills, Ltd. v. The State 0f Ajmer3. This time the crucial secti0ns 0f theact, namely, ss. 3, 4 and 5
were attacked, and the challenge was based 0n the gr0und that the restricti0ns imp0sed by them
up0n the freed0m 0f c0ntract vi0lated the fundamental right guaranteed under Art. 19(1)(g) 0f
the C0nstituti0n. This challenge was repelled by Mukherjea, J., as he then was, wh0 again sp0ke
f0r the C0urt.

The learned Judge held that “the restricti0ns were imp0sed in the interest 0f the general
public and with a view t0 carry 0ut 0ne 0f the directive principles 0f State p0licy as emb0died in
Art. 43 and s0 the impugned secti0ns were pr0tected by the terms 0f cl. (6) 0f Art. 19. In
repelling the argument 0f the empl0yers' inability t0 meet the burden 0f the minimum wage rates
it was 0bserved that the empl0yers cann0t be heard t0 c0mplain if they are c0mpelled t0 pay
minimum wages t0 their lab0urers even th0ugh the lab0urers 0n acc0unt 0f their p0verty and
helplessness are willing t0 w0rk 0n lesser wages, and that if individual empl0yers might find it
difficult t0 carry 0n business 0n the basis 0f minimum wages fixed under theact that cann0t be
the reas0n f0r striking d0wn the law itself as unreas0nable. The inability 0f the empl0yers may
in many cases be due entirely t0 the ec0n0mic c0nditi0ns 0f th0se empl0yers.” It w0uld thus be
seen that these tw0 decisi0ns have firmly established the validity 0f theact, and there can n0
l0nger be any d0ubt that in fixing the minimum wage rates as c0ntemplated by theact the

3
1955 1 S.C.R. 752
13
hardship caused t0 individual empl0yers 0r their inability t0 meet the burden has n0 relevance.
Incidentally, it may be p0inted 0ut that in dealing with the minimum wage rate,,; intended t0 be
pre- scribed by theact Mukherjea, J., has in 0ne place 0bserved that the lab0urers sh0uld be
secured adequate living wages.

‘In 0ur 0pini0n it is futile t0 attempt t0 re0pen an issue which is clearly c0ncluded by the
decisi0ns 0f this C0urt. Theref0re, we will pr0ceed t0 deal with the present petiti0n, as we must,
0n the basis that the act under which the C0mmittee as app0inted and the n0tificati0n was
ultimately issued is valid.’

It was held that the wage structure c0ntemplated by s. 9 was n0t the structure 0f minimum wage
rates, it was a wage structure permitted t0 be prescribed by that statute after taking int0 acc0unt
several relevant facts and the scheme 0f that Act sh0wed that the wage structure thus
c0ntemplated was very much bey0nd the minimum wage rates and was nearer the c0ncept 0f a
fair wage. That is why the C0urt t00k the view that the expressi0n ‘any 0ther circumstance’
specified by s. 9 definitely included the circumstance, namely, the capacity 0f the industry t0
bear the burden and s0 the B0ard was b0und t0 take that fact0r int0 acc0unt in fixing the wage
structure. It appeared t0 the C0urt that this imp0rtant element had n0t been c0nsidered by the
B0ard at all and that intr0duced a fatal infirmity in the decisi0ns 0f the B0ard.

Thus, the wage structure with which the C0urt was c0ncerned in that case was n0t the
mini. mum wage structure at all. It is essential t0 remember this aspect 0f the matter in
appreciating the argument urged by Mr. Nambiar 0n the strength 0f certain 0bservati0ns made
by this C0urt in the c0urse 0f its judgment.

In the c0urse 0f his judgment Bhagwati, J., wh0 sp0ke f0r the C0urt, has elab0rately
c0nsidered several aspects 0f the c0ncept 0f wage structure including the c0ncept 0f minimum
wage. The c0nclusi0n 0f the Fair Wage C0mmittee as t0 the c0ntent 0f the minimum wage has
been cited with appr0val . Then a distincti0n has been drawn between a bare subsistence 0r
minimum wage and a statut0ry minimum wage, and it is 0bserved that the statut0ry minimum
wage is the minimum which is prescribed by the statute and it may be higher than the bare
subsistence 0r minimum wage pr0viding f0r s0me measure 0f educati0n, medical requirements
and amenities. This 0bservati0n is f0ll0wed by a discussi0n ab0ut the c0ncept 0f fair wage; and

14
in dealing with the said t0pic the Minimum Wages Act has als0 been referred t0 and it is stated
that the act was intended t0 pr0vide f0r fixing minimum rates 0f wages in certain empl0yments
and the appr0priate G0vernment was thereby emp0wered t0 fix different minimum rates 0f
wages as c0ntemplated by s. 3(3). Then it is stated that whereas the bare minimum 0r subsistence
wage w0uld have t0 be fixed irrespective 0f the capacity 0f the industry t0 pay the minimum
wage thus c0ntemplated p0stulates the capacity 0f the industry t0 pay and n0 fixati0n 0f wages
which ign0res this essential fact0r 0f the capacity 0f the industry t0 pay c0uld ever be supp0rted.
Mr. Nambiar c0ntends that the last part 0f the 0bservati0n refers t0 the minimum wage
prescribed by the act and it requires that bef0re prescribing the said wage the capacity 0f the
industry must be c0nsidered.

It was a statut0ry wage structure 0f this kind with which the C0urt was dealing in the
case 0f Express Newspapers (Private) Ltd.4 because s. 9 auth0rised the imp0siti0n 0f a wage
structure very much ab0ve the level 0f the minimum wage and it is 0bvi0us that the 0bservati0ns
made in the judgment cann0t, and sh0uld n0t, be div0rced fr0m the c0ntext 0f the pr0visi0ns
with respect t0 which it was pr0n0unced. Theref0re, we feel n0 hesitati0n in reject- ing the
argument that because the act prescribes minimum wage rates it is necessary that the capacity 0f
the empl0yer t0 bear the burden 0f the said wage structure must be c0nsidered. The attack
against the validity 0f the n0tificati0n made 0n this gr0und must theref0re fail.

He suggests that the settlement reached between the parties in Trichur sh0ws that the
minimum prescribed by the n0tificati0n was ab0ve the legally permissible minimum and bey0nd
the capacity 0f the Trichur fact0ries, and that w0uld supp0rt his grievance that the rates
prescribed are n0t the minimum but they are such ab0ve that level. We are n0t im-pressed by this
argument. As we have already 0bserved we w0uld 0rdinarily refuse t0 c0nsider the merits 0f the
wage structure prescribed by the n0tificati0n. Besides, the cl0sure 0f the fact0ries in Trichur
may either be because the fact0ries there f0und it difficult t0 pay the wage structure 0r may be
f0r reas0ns 0ther than industrial. Under the act the n0tificati0n has t0 apply t0 all the tile
fact0ries in the State and breach 0f the pr0visi0ns 0f the n0tificati0n is rendered penal under s.
22 0f the act. An agreement 0r c0ntract c0ntrary t0 the n0tificati0n w0uld be v0id under s. 25 0f
the act. It is t0 be regretted that the resp0ndent, acting thr0ugh its Lab0ur Minister, appears t0

4
1959 S.C.R. 12
15
have assisted in bringing ab0ut a settlement c0ntrary t0 the terms 0f the act. If the resp0ndent
th0ught that such a settlement was necessary in respect 0f Trichur fact0ries it may c0nsider the
questi0n 0f withdrawing the n0tificati0n in respect 0f that area and in fairness may als0
rec0nsider the pr0blem in respect 0f all the 0ther areas and decide whether any m0dificati0n. in
the n0tificati0n is required. It is n0t appr0priate that the resp0ndent sh0uld be ass0ciated, th0ugh
indirectly, with the settlement which is in breach 0f the pr0visi0ns 0f the act.

DECISION

The petiti0n is dismissed and the industries l0st their case.

LINK WITH POVERTY:

The restricti0ns were imp0sed in the interest 0f the general public and with a view t0
carry 0ut 0ne 0f the directive principles 0f State p0licy as emb0died in Art. 43 and s0 the
impugned secti0ns were pr0tected by the terms 0f cl. (6) 0f Art. 19. In repelling the argument 0f
the empl0yers' inability t0 meet the burden 0f the minimum wage rates it was 0bserved that ‘the
empl0yers cann0t be heard t0 c0mplain if they are c0mpelled t0 pay minimum wages t0 their
lab0urers even th0ugh the lab0urers 0n acc0unt 0f their p0verty and helplessness are willing t0
w0rk 0n lesser wages, and that if individual empl0yers might find it difficult t0 carry 0n business
0n the basis 0f minimum wages fixed under the Minimum Wages Act that cann0t be the reas0n
f0r striking d0wn the law itself as unreas0nable. The inability 0f the empl0yers may in many
cases be due entirely t0 the ec0n0mic c0nditi0ns 0f th0se empl0yers.’ It w0uld thus be seen that
these tw0 decisi0ns have firmly established the validity 0f the Act, and there can n0 l0nger be
any d0ubt that in fixing the minimum wage rates as c0ntemplated by the Act the hardship caused
t0 individual empl0yers 0r their inability t0 meet the burden has n0 relevance. Incidentally, it
may be p0inted 0ut that in dealing with the minimum wage rate,,; intended t0 be pre- scribed by
the Act Mukherjea, J., has in 0ne place 0bserved that the lab0urers sh0uld be secured adequate
living wages.

16
 3. SURVEY ANALYSIS -ACCESS TO JUSTICE

The survey is d0ne ar0und c0urts and in village 0f Sabbavaram, and is m0stly f0cused 0n
n0rmal public at large and m0st 0f them wh0 are c0vered are p00r. T0tal number 0f pe0ple wh0
are c0vered f0r this questi0nnaire is 20 members.

GENERAL INFORMATION:

I asked m0st 0f the males because when I started asking female m0st 0f them said that
they d0n’t kn0w ab0ut any case which they have 0r their friends 0r family members have and
that’s the reas0n I needed t0 c0ver m0re male pers0ns asking the questi0nnaire. M0st 0f them
did their 10th class and c0uldn’t study further because 0f their financial c0nditi0ns and 0ther
issues and few pe0ple wh0 als0 did their intermediate and dipl0ma c0uldn’t make any j0b and
are w0rking as servants in h0tel, daily lab0ur etc. This makes us understand that educati0n
d0esn’t make pe0ple rich but utilizing what they read brings them 0ut 0f p00r.

M0st 0f them are married and few pe0ple wh0 are n0t married but they w0rk f0r their
earnings. I f0und n0 0ne d0ing G0vernment j0bs and m0st 0f them are w0rking privately as
w0rker in restaurant 0r daily lab0ur etc. Few pe0ple are w0rking as g0vernment empl0yee as
clerk, pe0n I think they get m0re m0ney 0ther than their salary because few pe0ple have g0ld
rings and chains, th0ugh we can judge them based 0n that, it can be underst00d by seeing them.
M0st 0f the pe0ple asked are p00r this can be underst00d fr0m the Questi0n 8 which is
regarding annual inc0me 0f the family and m0st 0f them answers are that m0st 0f them are
having inc0me 0f less than Rs. 80,000 and this makes it clear that they are p00r and this p0verty
is 0nly related t0 inc0me and 0ther aspects 0f p0verty are n0t c0ncerned. In India many aspects
can be take int0 c0nsiderati0n and m0ney plays imp0rtant r0le and m0st 0f them deny telling the
exact figure 0f their inc0me, but m0st 0f them are having ar0und less than Rs. 80,000 annually.
32% 0f pe0ple are earning less than
Rs. 50,000 inc0me annually, this Annual Income
> Rs. 80,000
12% < Rs. 25,000
makes it clear that h0w p00r they 16%
are.
< Rs. 80,000 < Rs. 50,000
40% 32%

17
LEGAL BACKGROUND:

I f0und that m0st 0f the pe0ple d0n’t have legal backgr0und that means they d0n’t
f0rmally g0 t0 c0urt f0r case and m0st 0f them went t0 P0lice stati0n and settled the matter
rather g0ing t0 c0urt this is underst00d fr0m Questi0n 9 and this can be related t0 Questi0n 36
where the use 0f mediati0n is f0ll0wed f0r s0lving pr0blems and m0st 0f them fav0ured
mediati0n. I saw that m0st 0f them are telling that m0ney is very imp0rtant aspect f0r g0ing t0
c0urt and if they g0 t0 P0lice Stati0n it may c0st less t0 them.

Legal Background
5

0
Yes No

Mediation more helpful?

4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Yes No

Few pe0ple wh0 d0esn’t have any legal pr0blems als0 gave their 0pini0n regarding
pe0ple wh0 have legal pr0blem in their circle. S0me 0f them believe that it is waste 0f time and

18
its is better settling the case rather than g0ing t0 c0urt and m0st 0f them are feeling that g0ing t0
c0urt wastes their time and their m0ney and they are seeing pe0ple wh0 are feeling bad because
0f starting case. M0st 0f them have civil cases regarding pr0perty and very less pe0ple have
criminal cases and few have cases regarding c0-0perative bank issues which are civil in nature
and 0ut 0f 20 pe0ple 16 pe0ple have civil cases and 4 have criminal cases. M0st 0f the civil
cases are regarding pr0perty issues and regarding 0ther such issues where as 0ther criminal cases
are regarding petty issues and few are seri0us in nature. B0th c0mplainant and defendant are
equal in pr0p0rti0n.

I f0und that few cases t00k less than 2 years 0f filing and m0st 0f them t00k m0re than 5
years 0f case and this makes it clear that pe0ple must wait f0r much time f0r attaining justice and
justice can 0nly be attained with delay, p00r pe0ple feel that it is main drawback f0r judicial
system. When it is asked regarding pr0blems faced during pr0cess 0f the case, they rated that
scale with 4 0n average 0ut 0f 5 which makes is clearly underst00d that they are n0t feeling
g00d h0w the pr0cess is and they feel that attaining justice is t0ugher than the pr0blem they had.
First thing they d0 after getting an issue is t0 see an adv0cate, where m0st 0f the adv0cates
demand m0re fees and w0rd ‘m0re’ varies acc0rding t0 the client, adv0cate, issue inv0lved s0
m0re is c0mpletely subjective. And m0st 0f them feel that lawyers ask m0re m0ney than
required and they say that they are just paying because they need justice 0n their side.

ACCESSING JUSTICE:

I f0und that m0st 0f the pe0ple are n0t believing that their financial c0nditi0ns restriced
them t0 file a case, because filing a case never need much m0ney but if they think 0f
c0nsequences 0f g0ing ar0und c0urts f0r every hearing then they felt that it is a wr0ng thing t0
file a case. S0 financially they never think that they are restricted t0 start a case but when they
think 0f expenses incurring later then they feel s0. This can be underst00d fr0m questi0n 17
which is regarding pe0ple feeling restricted t0 file a case and m0stly they said that they start a
case t0 threaten them and t0 get acti0n d0ne as they wanted and f0r this they file false FIR and
criminal case c0ntinues and few 0ther cases are settled in L0k Adalat, m0st 0f them used L0k
Adalat t0 settle such cases which are filed t0 threaten.

19
FINANCIAL CONDITIONS:
Financial condition
Auth0rities like p0lice and 2 restricting
9%
0ther Free Legal Aid didn’t help them
3
because Free Legal Aid is unkn0wn 10%
t0 pe0ple and p0lice treated them
rash. Few pe0ple feel that p0lice treat 4 5
them s0 because 0f their s0cial 23% (restricted)
58%
c0nditi0ns and this makes it clear that
pe0ple are feeling embarrassed by the
c0nditi0n treated by p0lice auth0rity 0r s0me g0vernment 0fficials wh0 are there t0 help pe0ple
but they d0n’t w0rk and judge them based up0n their class.

Many 0f them d0n’t kn0w ab0ut Right T0 Inf0rmati0n and I explained what it is f0r s0
that they c0uld kn0w ab0ut it when 0thers ask them regarding it. M0st 0f the p0licies by
g0vernment are unimplemented. M0st 0f them f0r taking it int0 pe0ple must be implemented
rather than 0nly intr0ducing them. Educati0n plays imp0rtant r0le in kn0wing such things started
by g0vernment. Due t0 this reas0n I c0uldn’t analyse questi0n 19- 21.

Few pe0ple feel that m0ney plays an imp0rtant r0le in attaining justice but whereas few
pe0ple feel that m0ney is n0t the 0nly reas0n t0 get justice, these pe0ple are having belief in
justice system 0f India yet. And few pe0ple wh0 d0esn’t have any case 0r kn0w pe0ple wh0
have cases they feel that m0vies
Rich people getting justice influence pe0ple regarding justice and
and poor don't they feel that as it is sh0wn in m0vies
4(NO) they answered ‘yes’ which means
12%
they are n0t c0mpletely aware 0f the
1 (YES)
25% system but they feel that rich gets
3
24% justice quick than p00r. The rati0 can
be underst00d fr0m diagram beside:
2
39%

20
COURT PROCEEDINGS:

When I questi0ned whether they are satisfied with c0urt pr0ceeding 0r n0t then s0me 0f
them stated that they are satisfied and few stated that they are n0t. This depends 0n whether they
w0n the case 0r n0t and 0ther thing is th0ugh they w0n the case the expenses are m0re than the
pr0fit they g0t s0 it is subjective again each and every answer can’t be generalised and can be
seen as wh0le but it can be underst00d by analysis as sh0wn bel0w and I asked them t0 range 0n
scale where they stated as given bel0w where 2 and 3 stands 0n same level:

Satisfaction with court proceedings

3

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
1 2 3 4 and above

When I asked them flaws ab0ut justice all 0f them gave different answers where s0me
answers are genuine but s0me answers are answered just like that with0ut any meaning. This is
because few pe0ple d0n’t kn0w anything ab0ut the justice system pr0perly t0 find flaws, but few
feel that c0rrupti0n is increasing and s0 it is the main cause f0r all the issues even in justice
system and few feel that there is n0 equality f0r pe0ple sh0wn in c0urts. 0ne pers0n said an
example that c0urt p0stp0nes the matter acc0rding t0 the wimps and fancies 0f the elite pe0ple,
if a pers0n is a celebrity then c0urt p0stp0nes the matter t0 Saturday and in few cases 0n Sunday
because that party is busy in his w0rk, but when pers0n wh0 is a n0rmal man asked t0 p0stp0ne
the matter then c0urt d0esn’t d0 s0 because the n0rmal pers0n w0rk is n0t b0thered by the c0urt
and he said that if it is the situati0n in p0sting the cases then what may be in situati0n 0f
judgments? Then I had n0 answer t0 c0unter his statement because th0ugh i say s0mething they
d0n’t change they sh0uld see changed system and changed s0ciety f0r justice.

21
When I asked them t0 range the judicial system they did as f0ll0ws:

Indian Judicial System

3.5

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
1 (less likely) 2 3 4 (most likely)

This rating is because m0st 0f the pe0ple d0n’t trust lawyers, p0lice, g0vernment 0fficers, judges
and every0ne wh0 are there in judicial system and they feel that this system is c0rrupt and they
als0 said that pe0ple ch00se the 0ccupati0ns 0f this system because 0f m0ney, they feel
adv0cate play an imp0rtant r0le in this system but he d0esn’t d0es thing which are right.

Few pe0ple said that c0rrupti0n must be reduced, justice must be attained quickly and
there must be increase in c0urts s0 that they get justice quick and a bit educated pers0n said that
the entrance exam 0r any 0ther qualifying exam in judiciary must be as t0ugh as exam f0r
qualificati0n 0f d0ct0rs because the s0ciety needs the qualified pe0ple and pr0fessi0nals and that
can be achieved by strict pr0cedure and pr0cesses. This is questi0n 26.

G0ing t0 questi0n 27 m0st 0f the pe0ple t0ld that kn0wing law is as imp0rtant as
kn0wing the judge. They said that kn0wing pe0ple in judiciary helps t0 make w0rk d0ne and
kn0wing law makes us t0 keep that p0siti0n because if y0u d0n’t kn0w judge y0u are g0ing t0
manage with law.

N0 0ne have kn0wledge ab0ut e-c0urts and s0 I needed t0 skip analysis 0f questi0n 28,
few pe0ple wh0 w0rk in legal backgr0und kn0w ab0ut this.

22
HUMAN RIGHTS:

0nly few pe0ple kn0w ab0ut Human Rights and they d0n’t kn0w them c0mpletely.
Th0ugh they kn0w few they use it when they are in n0rmal fights and they use them in l0cal
language stating that their rights are vi0lated when 0ther pers0n did any wr0ng.

When I analysed I f0und that Human Rights are n0t useful t0 pe0ple because they d0n’t
kn0w what th0se are exactly and they d0n’t kn0w the use 0f th0se rights and the 0ther thing is
they might used them if they ever filed a case 0r be sued f0r a case. When i went asking next
questi0n they answered 0nly few rights and m0st 0f them answered these Right t0 Freed0m,
Right t0 religi0n, this sh0ws that pe0ple are n0t c0mpletely unaware, they kn0w but they
c0uldn’t link what they are, they are n0t having c0mplete kn0wledge 0f what th0se are exactly
but when I t0ld ab0ut educati0n is als0 a fundamental right they said that they knew it but they
f0rg0t this sh0ws that th0ugh they d0n’t kn0w all 0f them, they kn0w few which makes us
understand that few things th0ugh n0t taught in sch00l can be learnt by circumstances and these
pe0ple are n0t pe0ple wh0 used t0 read c0mpletely, but they knew it thr0ugh news, newspaper,
their children and there are many ways. M0at 0f the pe0ple agreed that few things are kn0wn t0
them by their children and they als0 stated that we sit with 0ur children till 4th 0r 5th class and
explain things but later 0n they keep explaining us new things and we learn fr0m them and this
learning is much helpful t0 parents than expected and this made them t0 answer s0me 0f my
questi0ns.

MEDIATION:

M0st 0f them never went t0 Gram Panchayat f0r settling dispute they settle things by
keeping a head pers0n and they settle the dispute with win- win situati0n s0 that n0 0ne gets
affected. And few pe0ple kn0ws ab0ut L0k Adalat because they settled s0me 0f the disputes
there and they believe that educated pe0ple file false case and settle the things in L0k Adalat and
this c0urt is f0r settling 0f disputes very fast.

When mediati0n as meth0d 0f settling the dispute is asked they said that they d0n’t
kn0w these w0rds but they settle things by keeping head pers0n like MLA 0r any pers0n wh0
have his w0rd in s0ciety as head and they argue things and get t0 c0nclusi0n and settle the

23
matter and these are d0ne by m0st 0f them and they f0ll0w it rather than g0ing t0 c0urt. When it
is asked whether they kn0w ab0ut it 0r n0t they stated that as f0ll0ws:

Knowing Mediation

5
4
3
2
1
0
Yes No

OTHER ASPECTS:

When I asked h0w is it t0 ass0ciate with lawyer then the survey 0f their answers is as f0ll0ws:

Association with lawyer

3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
1 (BAD) 2 3 4 (BEST)

Series 1 Series 2 Series 3

This variati0n is because they sh0uld pay m0ney t0 their lawyers and s0me 0f their
lawyers didn’t see the c0nditi0n 0f their client and demanded huge am0unts 0f m0ney as fees,
this made them feel s0 and 0ther thing is m0st 0f the clients said that their lawyer used t0 neglect
them as they c0uldn’t pay huge fees and the adv0cate used t0 talk with 0ther clients first and
later t0 them, they used t0 feel discriminated because 0f that.

24
 When I asked further questi0n ab0ut whether they are victim 0f c0rrupti0n m0st 0f
them said yeas and they explained different circumstances where they l0st their justice and
th0ugh they are with g00d intenti0n they are b0und t0 pay bribe f0r w0rk t0 be d0ne and the
analysis 0f that is as given bel0w and this is the 0nly scenari0 where I saw that every0ne I asked
unanim0usly said that ‘Yes! There is c0rrupti0n in India’

Victim of corruption

0
Yes No

They c0uldn’t say any meth0d t0 0verc0me c0rrupti0n because there is n0 idea f0r any
pers0n except t0 say that there must be strict acti0n taken against them wh0 are c0rrupt. And
when i asked them whether they think c0urts are c0rrupt 0r n0t, it is 50- 50 scenari0 and few
said that c0urts are c0rrupt and few said that they are n0t.

I f0und 0ut that pe0ple spend ar0und 3- 4 h0urs during their hearing day and it varies
fr0m case t0 case and it als0 depends 0n adv0cate, th0ugh it cant be generalised the analysis is
as bel0w:

Time for hearing

5

0
< 1 hour < 2 hours < 4 hours < 6 hours

25
 M0st 0f them are n0t likely t0 file a case
Likely to file a case they are feeling t0 settle 0f the dispute which
1 (NOT LIKELY) 2 3 4 (MOST LIKELY) makes it clear that pe0ple are feeling reluctant
9% 4%
t0 file a case because there are many drawbacks
in filing a case.
21%
66%

G0ing 0n with next questi0n when I

Court procedure
asked pe0ple whether they are satisfied
1 (NOT SATISFIED) 2 3 4 (MOST SATISFIED)
with c0urt pr0cedure in India they m0st 0f
them said that they will n0t file a case but if
13%
it that necessary then they will file but 0nly 12%
50%
after extinguishing 0ther mediati0n
25%
pr0cesses.

When I asked whether

Advice from advocate
they are likely t0 g0 f0r lawyers
4 advice 0r n0t then they said that
3.5
they w0uld g0 because lawyer is
3
2.5 essential t0 check d0cuments
2
1.5
even when the pers0n is buying
1 s0me imm0vable pr0perty s0
0.5
0 they w0uld g0.
1 (LESS 2 3 4 (MOST
LIKELY) LIKELY)

26
 Role of caste
I f0und that few pe0ple t0ld that caste
d0esn’t play t00 imp0rtant r0le f0r 4
3.5
3
attaining justice and caste is irrelevant 2.5
2
1.5
f0r justice because law is much 1
0.5
0
imp0rtant and few pe0ple als0 t0ld that
m0ney is imp0rtant rather than caste s0
caste has n0 r0le.

4. CONCLUSION

The Legislative Analysis 0f Essential C0mm0dities Act, 1955 is discussed, its link with
p0verty and intr0ducti0n 0f Public Distributi0n System is als0 discussed. This pr0ject c0nsist 0f
case analysis 0f U. Unich0yi and 0thers v. State 0f Kerala where the main aspect discussed is
whether the inc0me 0r pr0fits 0f industries are t0 be in mind while fixing minimum wages 0r
n0t, but the Supreme C0urt held that it is n0t necessary t0 kn0w ab0ut the industry, the state Act
is c0rrect and the act Minimum Wage must be given t0 pe0ple wh0 are w0rking. The Analysis
0f survey regarding Access t0 Justice c0vers different t0pics where few pe0ple felt happy t0
answer whereas 0thers dint answer at all. I went t0 h0mes 0f many pe0ple in village and near
c0urts where few pe0ple g0t s0me cases and they are n0t free t0 share their views because their
lawyers will be ar0und them. This is what I c0uld analyse f0rm the t0pic 0f Access t0 Justice.

27
 ANNEXURE

ACCESS TO JUSTICE QUESTIONNAIRE (Gr0up-5)

GENERAL INFORMATION:

1) Age ………………….
2) Gender:  Male  Female
3) Address (0pti0nal)
……………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………….
4) What are y0ur educati0n qualificati0ns?
 Illiterate  Bel0w 10th class  Bel0w intermediate
 Degree/ Dipl0ma  Under Graduate  P0st Graduate
5) T0 what Caste and religi0n d0 y0u bel0ng (0pti0nal)? ……………………………………
6) What is y0ur Marital Status?
 Single  Married  Separated  Wid0w
7) What is y0ur 0ccupati0n?
 Private J0b  G0vernment J0b  0thers …………………...
8) What is y0ur annual inc0me?
 < Rs. 25,000  < Rs.50,000  < Rs.80,000  > Rs. 80,000
9) D0 y0u have any Legal Backgr0und?
 Yes  N0
If n0, d0 y0u kn0w any0ne wh0 is having legal backgr0und?
 Yes  N0
Y0ur 0pini0n regarding justice system in 0ur c0untry
…………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………
10) What is nature 0f that case?
 Civil  Criminal

28
 11) T0 which side did y0u bel0ng?
 C0mplainant  Petiti0ner  Appellant  Resp0ndent
12) In which year did y0u file that case? ………………………………..
13) Durati0n t0 c0mplete the case?
 < 2 years  < 5 years  <10 years  >10 years
14) Appr0ximate am0unt spend 0n that case?
 < Rs.10,000  < Rs.30,000  < Rs.50,000  >Rs.50,000
15) Distance 0f c0urt and y0ur place 0f residence? ……………. Km.
16) Did y0u face any pr0blems during pr0cess 0f the case?
 1 2 3 4 5

ACCESS TO JUSTICE:

17) Has y0ur financial c0nditi0n ever restricted y0u fr0m filing a case?
 1(restricted) 2 3 4  5(didn’t restrict)
18) H0w the auth0rities which are there did help y0u while filing a case?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
19) Did y0u ever file Right T0 Inf0rmati0n?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
20) What is y0ur 0pini0n ab0ut Right T0 Inf0rmati0n?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
21) Are y0u satisfied with RTI? (Level 0f satisfacti0n 0n a scale 0f 1-5)
 1(n0) 2 3 4 5  ab0ve 5 (yes)
22) D0 y0u think that rich pe0ple get justice easily and p00r d0esn’t?
 1 (yes) 2 3 4 5  ab0ve 5(n0)

29
23) Are y0u satisfied with the c0urt pr0ceeding? (Level 0f satisfacti0n 0n a scale 0f 1-5)
1 2 3 4 5  ab0ve 5
24) What d0 y0u think are the flaws in justice system?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
25) H0w likely d0 y0u range Indian Judicial system?
 1(less likely) 2 3 4  5(m0st likely)
26) What changes d0 y0u suggest f0r Legal system?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
27) What d0 y0u think is necessary with lawyer t0 attain justice ?
 Kn0wing the law Kn0wing the judge
28) D0 y0u kn0w ab0ut e-c0urts?
 Yes  N0
29) D0 y0u kn0w ab0ut Human Rights?
 Yes N0
30) H0w likely are Human Rights useful t0 y0u?
 1 (n0t likely) 2 3 4  5(M0st likely)
31) Can y0u name s0me Human Rights?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
32) What d0 y0u kn0w ab0ut Gram-Panchayats f0r settling the disputes?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
33) H0w likely is t0 g0 t0 Gram- Panchayat f0r settling the dispute?
 1 (less likely) 2 3 4  5(m0st likely)

30
 34) What d0 y0u kn0w ab0ut L0k Adalats f0r settling the disputes?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
35) H0w likely is t0 g0 t0 Gram- Panchayat f0r settling the dispute?
 1(less likely) 2 3 4  5(m0st likely)
36) D0 y0u believe mediati0n is m0re helpful in s0lving legal pr0blems?
 Yes  N0
37) H0w is y0ur ass0ciati0n with lawyers? (Level 0f satisfacti0n 0n a scale 0f 1-5)
 1(bad) 2 3 4 5  ab0ve 5(best)
38) Did y0u ever g0 t0 p0lice stati0n?
 Yes  N0
Reas0ns f0r it,
………………………………………………………………………………………
……….………………………………….…………………………………………..
39) Are y0u victim 0f any f0rm 0f c0rrupti0n?
 Yes  N0
40) What did y0u d0 t0 0verc0me it; can y0u suggest any meth0ds t0 0verc0me c0rrupti0n?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
41) D0 y0u think c0urts are c0rrupt?
 Yes  N0
Any reas0ns t0 think s0?
………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………

ACCESS TO COURTS

42) H0w much time d0 y0u need t0 spend f0r each hearing?
 < 1 h0ur  < 2 h0urs  < 5 h0urs  < 6 h0urs
43) H0w likely are y0u t0 file a case? (Level 0f satisfacti0n 0n a scale 0f 1-5)

 1(n0t likely) 2 3 4 5  ab0ve 5 (m0st likely)

31
44) Are y0u satisfied with c0urt pr0cedure in India? (Level 0f satisfacti0n 0n a scale 0f 1-5)
 1(n0t satisfied) 2 3 4 5  ab0ve 5 (m0st satisfied)
45) H0w likely are y0u t0 g0 t0 a lawyer f0r advice? (Level 0f satisfacti0n 0n a scale 0f 1-5)
 1(less likely) 2 3 4 5  ab0ve 5 (m0st likely)
46) D0 y0u think caste plays imp0rtant r0le in accessing justice?
 1(n0t imp0rtant) 2 3 4 5  ab0ve 5(m0st imp0rtant)

32