You are on page 1of 6

CASE ANALYSIS OF

BANDHUA MUKTI MORCHA VS UION OF INDIA

(AIR 1984 SC 802)

SUBMITTED BY SUBMITTED TO

DINESH CHOUDHARY DR. VINOD CHOUDHARY SIR

B.A.LL.B 8TH SEM

ROLL NO. 18BAL50016

SUBJECT – LABOUR LAW AND INDUSTRIAL LAWS

SESSION – 2021-22

JAI NARAIN VYAS UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR


FACULTY OF LAW
Introduction-

As a result of a public interest litigation filed in the Apex Court, the State of
Uttar Pradesh was directed by the Supreme Court to abolish the use of child
labor in the carpet industry and to make certain policies or directives for benefit
of children so that they can have access to education and get certain health
facilities.

Statues and provisions of law involved–

Bonded labor systems Act, 1976

Mines Rules, 1955

Mines Vocational Training Rules, 1966

Maternity Benefits Act, 1961

Article 32 of the Constitution of India

Brief facts–

The petitioner, an association committed to the reason of the arrival of


reinforced workers in the nation, tended to a letter to Hon’ble Bhagwati, J.
asserting:

(1) that there were a large number of workers from various parts of the nation
who were working in some of the stone quarries arrange in area Faridabad, the
State of Haryana under “brutal and insufferable conditions;

(2) that a large number of them were reinforced workers;

(3) that the arrangements of the Constitution and different social welfare laws
went to help the said laborers were definitely not being actualized with respect
to these laborers.

The candidate also referenced in the letter the names of the stone quarries and
points of interest of workers who were functioning as fortified workers and
implored that a writ is given for legitimate usage of the different provisions of
the social welfare enactment, for example, Mines Act, 1952 Inter-State Migrant
Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1979,
Contract Labor (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, Bonded Labor System
(Abolition) Act, 1976, Minimum Wages Act, Workmen’s Compensation Act,
Payment of Wages Act, Employees State Protection Act, Maternity Benefits
Act and so forth material to these laborers working in the said stone quarries to
finish the wretchedness, suffering and defenselessness of these casualties of the
cruelest abuse. The Court treated the letter as a writ petition and designated a
commission to ask into the charges made by the petitioner.

Issues Involved–

 Regardless of whether Article 32 of the Constitution is pulled in to the


moment case as no major right of the candidates or the laborers
alluded to in the request are encroached.
 Can a letter tended to with this Court be treated as a writ appeal and
without any checked request this Court can be moved to practice its
writ locale?
 During a procedure under Article 32 of the Constitution, would this be
able to Court be engaged to select any commission or an exploring
body to enquire into the claims made and makes a report to this Court
based on the inquiry to empower this Court to practice its capacity and
locale under Article 32 of the Constitution?

Arguments Advanced:

Petitioner’s contention –

 The entire environment in the supposed stone quarries was loaded with
residue and it was difficult for anyone to inhale;
 A portion of the laborers was not permitted to leave the stone quarries
and was giving constrained work; 
 There was no facility of giving unadulterated water to drink and the
workers were constrained to drink messy water from a nullah;
 The workers were not having a legitimate safe house in any case, they
were living in jhuggies with stones heaped one upon the different as
dividers and straw covering the top which was excessively low to
stand and which didn’t manage the cost of any assurance against the
sun
 Also, downpour; a portion of the workers were suffering from constant
illnesses; (vi) no pay was being paid to workers who were harmed
because of mishaps emerging in the course of work;
 There were no offices for medicinal treatment or tutoring.

Respondent’s contention –
The respondents contended:

 Article 32 of the Constitution is not attracted to the instant case as no


the central right of the petitioner or the laborers alluded to in the
appeal is encroached;
 A letter tended to by a gathering to this Court can’t be treated as a writ
appeal;
 In a procedure under Article 32, this Court is not enabled to designate
any commission or an exploring body to enquire into the claims made
in the writ appeal;
 Reports made by such commissions are in view of on ex-parte
explanations which have not been tried by interrogation and hence
they have no evidentiary worth; and
 There may be constrained workers in the stone quarries and stone
smashers in the State of Haryana however they were not fortified
workers inside the importance of that articulation as utilized in the
Bonded Labor System (Abolition) Act, 1976. 

Judgment–

In its judgment, the Court talked about the significance of securing children’s
privileges or rights to education, security, health and improvement of India as a
democratic country. While perceiving that child’s work couldn’t be nullified
quickly because of monetary need, the Court found that down to earth steps
could be taken to secure and advance the rights of youth in the destitution
stricken and powerless populaces of Indian culture. On the side of its decision,
the Court alluded to different basic rights and order standards of the Indian
Constitution including, Article 21 (the right to life and individual
freedom), Article 24 (denies work of children younger than 14 in plants, mines,
or different dangerous ventures), Article 39 (e) (disallows constraining residents
into employments unsuited for their age or quality), Article 39(f) (depicts the
State’s obligations to shield youngsters from abuse and to guarantee kids the
chances and offices to create in a sound way), and Article 45 (commands the
State to give free obligatory training to all children beneath 14 years). The Court
additionally noticed India’s commitments under the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child to give
free essential education to all kids in the nation, and to secure children against
financial abuse. The measures requested to nullify child labor work set out in a
prior case, M.C. Mehta v. Province of Tamil Nadu and Ors.[ii] was referenced
by the Court and fused in requests to the States of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. The
requests included guiding the States to find a way to outline arrangements to
logically dispose of the labor of children beneath the age of 14; give obligatory
instruction to all youngsters utilized in processing plants, mining, and different
enterprises; guarantee that the children get supplement rich nourishments; and
regulate occasional health registration.

Obiter dicta–
Not necessarily the aggrieved party always files a petition but also any person
with a bonafide intention file a case in order to protect the rights of others and
when it comes to the public interest or for the welfare of the common people a
mere letter can also be treated as a writ petition.

Rationale behind the judgment


The State Government’s protest with regards to the viability of the writ request
under Article 32 of the Constitution by the solicitors is indefensible. On the off
chance that any of the resident brings under the steady gaze of the Court an
objection that countless laborers or laborers are reinforced serfs or are being
oppressed to exploitation by a couple of mine renters or temporary workers or
managers or are being precluded the advantages from claiming social welfare
laws, the State Government, which is, under our protected plan, accused of the
strategic achieving another financial request where there will be social and
monetary equity for everybody correspondence of status and open door for all,
would respect a request by the court, so that in the event that it is discovered
that there are in truth fortified workers or regardless of whether the laborers are
not reinforced in the severe feeling of the term as characterized in the Bonded
Labor System (Abolition) Act 1976 yet they are made to give forced labor or are
relegated to an existence of absolute hardship and corruption, such a
circumstance can be fixed by the State Government. Regardless of whether the
State Government is on its own inquiry fulfilled that the laborers are not
reinforced and are not constrained to give constrained work and are living and
working in better than average conditions with all the essential necessities of
life gave to them, the State Government ought not to shy away from a request
by the court when a protest is brought by a resident, yet it ought to be on edge to
fulfill the court and through the court, the individuals of the nation, that it is
releasing its established commitment decently and enough and the laborers are
being guaranteed social and financial equity.

Conclusion–

This case alongside other PIL cases on the issue of child labor and scope of
child labor destruction battles, has been fruitful in bringing issues to light about
the issue of child labor and putting the issue conspicuously on the
administration’s plan. Policymaking and law are moving toward formal
annulment of child labor and various activities, particularly in the region of
education, are being attempted towards annihilating gruesome child labor. One
impact has been that the involvement of child laborers in the carpet industry has
been diminished. Be that as it may, a huge number of children despite
everything keep on being abused in India and there is a dire requirement for
more grounded and increasingly compelling insurances for child rights.

You might also like