ECONOMIC IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON MIGRANT LABOURERS

1
 Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................3

RESEARCH AIM AND OCJECTIVES..........................................................................................................4

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.....................................................................................................................4

CHAPTER 1: UNDER WHAT PROVISIONS WAS LOCKDOWN IMPOSED?.........................................4

CHAPTER 2: IMPACT ON MIGRANT WORKERS.....................................................................................6

CHAPTER 3: THE GOVERNMENT’S ECONOMIC RESPONSE...............................................................8

COUNCLUSION..............................................................................................................................................8

BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................................................9

2
INTRODUCTION
The COVID-19 epidemic, which has engulfed countries all over the world, has resulted in widespread pain
and death. It had a significant impact on the world economy. In the early weeks of 2020, the epidemic
struck a frail global economy for the first time. In almost all nations, strict lockdowns were implemented; in
many countries, a second lockdown was imposed in response to the second wave in the winter. The
economy came to a complete halt. The output of products and services decreased as industries and offices
were temporarily closed. The supply chain was significantly hampered. On the demand side, a contraction
occurred independently of the supply shock. People lost jobs and wages as economic entities were shut
down. Effective demand as a whole declined as well. The economic impact of the virus is becoming
increasingly obvious as infection rates in some nations appear to be levelling off and these countries begin
to reopen their economies. Within-country income inequality is likely to worsen as a result of COVID-19,
according to the World Bank (2021), partly because the pandemic disproportionately affects the incomes of
vulnerable groups, such as women, migrant workers, and those employed in lower-skilled occupations or in
the informal sector. This research paper analyses the economic consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic in
India. Even before the pandemic, the Indian economy had been experiencing a downturn in growth, as well
as unprecedented levels of unemployment and poverty. As a result, when the pandemic struck in March
2020, India’s capacity to deal with a new catastrophe was limited.

After March 2020, the Indian economy was hit by an economic crisis that impacted all sectors. Farmers
faced disrupted supply chains, a shortage of market outlets, low demand, and falling output prices in
agriculture. Micro and small businesses were the hardest hit in the industry. At least 15 million people lost
their jobs as a result of the crisis. The coronavirus outbreak has resulted in significant disasters all across
the world, including tens of thousands of deaths and financial ruin. The lock-down has altered not just how
we enter our environment, but also how we operate in many countries. Migrant workers have been affected
not only physically but also mentally by the COVID-19 outbreak and lockdown. 80 percent of India’s
population works as migrants, and they are among the most marginalised members of the informal
economy. The country’s infrastructure is being built on the backs of these people. They also migrate to
towns in search of work since they are unable to survive in their hometowns. They rarely belong to a labour
union and frequently work without benefits or contracts. They are also overwhelmingly from traditionally
oppressed populations, whom the government refers to as “scheduled castes”.

Migrant labourers are the most afflicted and insecure group, who are constantly subjected to Covid-19’s
merciless wrath. Covid-19 worsened migrant workers’ pain and grief, prompting them to abandon their
homes and return to their homeland, so violating their right to shelter. The terrible effects of Covid-19
would continue. Because of the reasonable restrictions placed on the freedom to travel within the country
during the lockdown, these migratory workers have been incapable of covering the required housing

3
expenditures. They had to walk miles, hungry and thirsty, to get to their destinations due to the ongoing
circumstances. Their right to a decent life is likewise jeopardised.

RESEARCH AIM AND OCJECTIVES

1. To know and study, in depth as to under what provisions the nation-wide lockdowns were imposed.
2. To know and study about the impact of such lockdowns on migrant workers.
3. To know about the remedies and effective measures, if any taken by the central government.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
“All progress is born of inquiry. Doubt is often better than overconfidence, for it leads to inquiry, and
inquiry leads to invention is a famous Hudson Maxim in context of which the significance of research can
well be understood. Increased amounts of research make progress possible1.” Research inculcates scientific
and inductive thinking and it promotes the development of logical habits of thinking and organisation. The
topic for this research paper is “Doctrine of Pre-emption under Islamic Law: An Analysis”, for which
doctrinal method of research is used to ensure valid and reliable results that address research aims and
objectives. The researcher took help from various authentic articles, renowned journals and books of law
for the purpose of this research paper. The researcher has done a qualitative analysis of all the sources cited
and relied upon for the matter of this research topic. The researcher has tried to provide an in-depth analysis
of the research topic, addressing all relevant points relating to the research topic. Due to paucity of time the
researcher has limited the research to the doctrinal method only.

CHAPTER 1: UNDER WHAT PROVISIONS WAS LOCKDOWN IMPOSED?

In terms of checking the acts of the union government to ameliorate the problems of travelling labourers,
the legal authorities, particularly the Supreme Court, have missed the mark. The unexpected action received
by the central government to halt the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a study into the
established and legal acceptability of some of these measures, as well as the resulting horrific emergency of
immigration. The Centre appears to have unrestricted authority under the Disaster Management Act, 2005
(DMA, 2005) to govern people’s lives and socioeconomic conditions. In addition, the possibility of
extending the Act’s standards to control a pandemic of this magnitude was initially discussed. The
definition of “disaster” in the 2005 Act does not appropriately depict the scope of the pandemic.
Nonetheless, the 2005 DMA was used as a test of human activity limitation and control. Sections 2 and 2A
of the Infectious Diseases Act, 1897, were introduced by the Cabinet Secretary on March 11, 2020, until
Lockdown, to control COVID-19 in India in all states and union territories. The COVID-19 was unique to
India, based on the Disaster Management Act of 2005, which defined earthquakes, catastrophes, and
calamities caused by natural or anthropogenic causes. As a result, the COVID-19 prevention plan is ipso
facto equated with the emergency management action associated with Articles 6 and 10 of the 2005

1
C.R. Kothari, Research Methodology Methods and Techniques, 2nd ed., New Age International (P) Limited, 2004.
4
Disaster Management Legislation. Sections 38 and 72 of the Statute provide for this under the national
lockdown. Lock-down was implemented at the state level in accordance with section 2 of the Act on
Infectious Diseases during colonial times. This provision allows the state administration to pass any
legislation it sees fit in order to counteract the outbreak. As a result of this provision, the Executive has
issued orders for the closure of services, the prohibition of meetings, and the limitation of transportation
and travel, all under the direction of state governments.2

The administration implemented the lockdown in three steps. Using clause 6(2)(i) and section 10 of the
2005 Act, a national order was issued on March 24, 2020. Section 6(2)(i) mandates that the National
Disaster Management Authority take whatever action it deems necessary to prevent and mitigate a disaster,
while Section 10 empowers the National Disaster Management Authority to issue binding directives and
guidance to many state governments on disaster management. A series of presidential decrees enacted
under section 10 of the NDMA operated as umbrella rules, ordering and essentially enforcing the lockdown
at the national level. The quarantine was imposed at the state level under section 2 of the Infectious Disease
Act of the colonial era. This section requires the state administration to pass any legislation it deems
necessary to contain the outbreak with arbitrary authority. As a result of this provision, the Executive has
issued orders for the closure of services, the prohibition of meetings, and the limitation of transportation
and travel, all under the direction of state governments. Third, at the district level, where successive
magistrates and police officers have issued successive orders limiting citizens’ movement under various
articles of the Code of Criminal Practice (section 144). As a result, the Executive, in general, can
summarise the legislative basis of the lockdown at all three levels, essentially in deep freeze without any
proportionality test by the Judiciary or the Laws.

Any executive order, most of them poorly worded and inaccessible to the public, is legitimate under
Section 10 of the NDMA and Section 2 of the EDA. It’s terrifying how easily the government has chosen
an authoritarian attitude, and how stupid and crippled we have been in our dealings with them. As a result,
the government rejected independence by enacting loosely written laws that allowed the state unrestricted
power in order to circumvent the Constitution. The administration was behaving as an Orwellian state
without even announcing an emergency. The unconstitutional clauses used to legitimise state action in the
aforementioned rules demonstrate this. One of these is Section 62 of the NDMA, which stipulates that
“irrespective of anything found in any other statute,” meaning that “it shall be applicable in any other law
irrespective of any contrary clause” when invoked. However, the ultra vires theory asserts that no statute or
regulation can be found to be in violation of the constitution. So, does the supra vires doctrine of the law of
necessity take precedence? The lockdown was constitutionally valid because it weakened the fundamental
rights guaranteed by Articles 14, 19, and 21. Third, at the district level, where successive magistrates and
police officials have issued directions preventing residents from travelling under distinct provisions of the
2
R. Ramakumar and Tejal Kanitkar, “Impact of Covid-19 Pandemic on Indian Economy”, Vol. 80 2021, Investigacion
Economica, pp. 5-8.
5
CrPC. As a result, the Executive, in general, can summarise the legislative basis of the lockdown at all three
levels, essentially in deep freeze without any proportionality test by the Judiciary or the Laws.

CHAPTER 2: IMPACT ON MIGRANT WORKERS

The Central Government passed the Act on Inter-State Migrant Workers in 1979 to curb contractors’
exploitative practise of hiring people from one state to do work in another. While the current work does not
go into detail about the Act’s system, it is reasonable to mention that the ignorant workforce is protected
from unscrupulous employers that deprive the workers they have arranged of the minimum salary and
working conditions. The regulatory instrument regulates the provider’s behaviour but does not establish
standards for state culpability in the event of a pandemic. It is also desirable to unfold the system’s leaves
in order to recognise migrant workers’ position and responsibilities to the states.

In this time of unrest, the Supreme Court should have served as a sentinel for the people, but its actions
have been disappointing and tardy. It appears that its findings pay little attention to the poor. This was clear
when Harsh Mander filed a PIL in the Supreme Court, requesting that employees be paid minimum wage
because their right to sustenance had been withdrawn, but the Supreme Court questioned why the
employment required money. When the government provides them with meals!

S.A. Bobde, India’s Chief Justice, believed that the impoverished simply need food for the money. He
couldn’t think of another reason why they may need money. When the reach of Article 21 is repeatedly
enlarged and it is declared that the right to life implies something more than merely animal life, but a life
with integrity, the Court, as the Constitution’s Sentinel, must revive itself and recollect its own decisions.
The Supreme Court has frequently taken the State’s story and the Solicitor General’s word at face value. It
was more obedient to the state and did not bother to judicially examine their claims.3

According to the CIME, 122 million people were unemployed in India during the first shutdown period,
with 75 percent of them being daily wage earners and small shopkeepers. (Unemployment rate in India,
CIME as of 20 August 2020). By the first quarter of June 2020, the country was expected to have a $26
billion deficit and a significant drop in GDP. The International Monetary Fund’s June 2020 Global
Economic Outlook Update predicted that real GDP growth will slow to -4.5 percent in 2020, before rising
to 6% in 2021. (IMF, World Economic Fund).

“The pandemic is a human catastrophe that is rapidly turning into a human rights issue,” UN Secretary-
General Antonio Guterres stated. The purpose of human rights is to provide all individuals with a dignified
existence, security, and dignity. The fundamental ideals on which our Constitution is founded are
jeopardised by something that violates these guarantees, resulting in a great setback for democracy. Articles
14, 19, and 21 form the Triangle of Gold, which attests to certain principles inherent in the Constitution.

3
Jos Meester and Machteld Ooijens, “Covid-19 Impact on the Value Chain- Conceptual paper”, 2020, Clingendael Institute.
6
Except in crises and situations like this, the government does not violate citizens’ human rights and is
committed to protect them.

The Supreme Court declared in PUDR vs. U0I that there was a right to a liveable wage against compelled
labour. It was pointed out that migrant and contract employees often had “little choice but to take any job
that came their way, even if the pay was less than the minimum wage.” As a result, the Court determined
that “the obligation of an economic condition that leaves an individual in need with no alternative but to
provide labour or service” was no less a form of forced labour than any other form of labour, and that its
solution was based on a constitutional minimum wage guarantee.

The right to nutritious food is another fundamental right that has been severely harmed by the pandemic.
The nation’s harsh and non-discriminatory attack on its inhabitants has exacerbated hunger and food
insecurity. The installation of a lockdown prevents food from being made available to the poor as quickly
as possible, depriving them of sustenance and forcing them to plead. The federal and state governments, on
the other hand, have collaborated to avoid starvation. The NGOs frequently work in shifts to guarantee that
no one sleeps on an empty stomach while they are working. The spectrum of human rights was
continuously enlarged by legal knowledge, taking into account DPSP.

As a result, the Supreme Court has interpreted Article 21 (which guarantees the right to life and personal
liberty) to entail that India has a right to food, which is included in the right to life. In Olga Tellis vs.
Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985), Chandrachud CJ, sitting for a five-judge bench, remarked, “If the
right to livelihood is not recognised as part of the fundamental right to life, it will be the easiest approach to
deprive a citizen of his right to life to the point of abrogation.” You can’t take away someone’s right to life
without also taking away their livelihood. As a result, the massive migration of the rural people to
metropolitan cities makes sense.

In the context of COVID-19, a lack of administrative help from state governments is contributing to
challenges for migrant workers. The government has a distinct perspective on the subject, which has a
significant impact on migrant workers’ life. Migrant labourers have had a tough time locating their homes
due to increased mistreatment. There have been numerous incidents of police repression against them in the
cities where they operate.

Migrant workers’ life is bleak during the epidemic since they are unable to visit their houses due to the
authorities’ inaction. The dearth of essential health services, sanitation, money, and other factors threaten
migrant workers during a pandemic, worsening the problem in the current scenario. They are also unable to
safely enter their homes due to a lack of financial and administrative aid. As a result, the current situation
of migrant workers, who should be covered by the government and authorities during the epidemic, is
jeopardised.

7
CHAPTER 3: THE GOVERNMENT’S ECONOMIC RESPONSE
In May 2020, the Union Government announced the creation of the National Migrant Information System,
which will allow the National Disaster Management Authority to build an information base connected to
the numbers, movement, and appearance of these workers, which will then be traded by various state
governments to facilitate government assistance planning. It was also meant to persuade the central
government to organise special trains for Shramik to transport these workers to their protests. After the
Central Government requested that the State Government set up help camps to deal with the basic
requirements of transient specialists, the State Government and NGOs set up such camps across the country
to assist these labourers with resolving their issues, particularly the food course to their goal.

The administration realised and responded to the economic consequences of the locking announcement.
The COVID-19 assistance package was announced by the Finance Minister on March 26. This will cover
up to $22.6 billion in free food grains, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), three-month cash payments, and
health-care provider perks. Despite this, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates that total funding
by central and state governments through various money and income flows and various activities, such as
medical services projects, research centres, and duty assistance, was only around 0.2 percent of India’s
GDP.

Critics argue that these payments are part of routine welfare payments to qualified areas and that they do
not address additional severe issues such as income losses, which result in persistent life hardships for
marginalised migrant workers who are stranded and out of employment. They claimed the state was using a
specific COVID-19 kit to disguise the small, targeted transactions. Furthermore, the additional free food
grains provided under the PDS will not assist migrant workers who are unable to return home and others
who do not have rationing cards. They do not receive higher MGNREGA (public works) salary when they
return home when the closure is completed. Furthermore, the GOI appears to continue to distribute food
based on outdated 2011 data under the National Food Security Act.

COUNCLUSION
According to the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker, India’s lockdown, which is regarded
as the world’s largest and most stringent, has created a slew of problems for individuals and communities
who are already repressed, marginalised, or otherwise vulnerable. The sequence of abuses of Fundamental
Rights has put the Constitutional fabric in jeopardy. Although the Constitution has always guaranteed a set
of rights on paper, the state has struggled to implement them in practise. The administration has yet to
respond to the most recent set of issues (education and privacy). However, sooner or later, the state would
have to deal with them. These fault lines were repeatedly revealed by scientists long before the Covid-19
epidemic, but the state ignored them time and time again. The State and the judiciary must immediately re-
evaluate and address these compliance shortcomings. Migrant workers’ problems are awful since they live

8
in poor living conditions during the pandemic. There is a lot of danger in their source and destination
regions. Migrant workers provide a significant contribution to a country’s economic development, but they
are compensated by the authorities with a lack of well-being and social assistance. During the epidemic,
immediate strategies for preventing and defending the rights of migratory workers are essential. The
government should make the necessary steps to ensure a safe transit into their homes. The authorities
should work for the well-being and social welfare of migrant workers. The government must adopt
effective methods to accommodate the requirements of migratory workers during the pandemic.
Government restrictions will be critical in ensuring that personnel move in a safe and respectful manner.
Migrant workers should be supplied with suitable housing in the event of a pandemic. It is the state’s
responsibility to protect migrant workers’ interests and uphold the dignity and legitimacy of the Indian
Constitution during the pandemic.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
I. Electronic Sources
1. Webliography
 https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep32150.11.
 https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26965501.
 https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep27518.4.
 https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep25670.
 https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep32250.
 https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep24952.