AN ANALYSIS IN THE LIGHT OF BANDHUAMUKTI MORCHA VS UNION OF

INDIA CASEI. INTRODUCTION

Bandhua Mukti Morcha is an organization dedicated to the cause of release of
bonded laborers in the country. The system of bonded labor has been prevalent in
various parts of the country since long prior tothe attainment of political freedom
and it constitutes an ugly
andshameful feature of our national life. This system based onexploitation by a few
socially and economically powerful personstrading on the misery and suffering of
large numbers of men andholding them in bondage is a relic of a feudal hierarchical
societywhich hypocritically proclaims the divinity of men but treats largemasses of
people belonging to the lower rungs of the social ladder or Economically
impoverished segments of society as dirt and chattel.This system under which one
person can be bonded to provide labor to another for years and years until an
alleged debts supposed to bewiped out which never seems to happen during the life
time of the bonded laborer, is totally incompatible with the new egalitarian
socioeconomic order which we have promised to build and it is not only anaffront
to basic human dignity but also constitutes gross and revoltingviolation of
constitutional values.Bandhua Mukti Morcha !BMM" was formed in #$%# to wage a
battleagainst the pernicious bonded labour system in &ndia. 'dministrativeand
political will to carry out the (onstitutional mandate and enforce prohibitive
laws of the land failed to produce any results. 'gainst allodds, Bandhua Mukti
Morcha has achieved the release of over #,)*,+++ bonded &ndians from the
shackles of slavery
.
' large number of them have been rehabilitated. rom the (arpet &ndustry alone,
about athousand children have been rescued and restored to their parents.Their
rehabilitation has been monitored effectively.

BMM has started

a campaign for the provision of nonformal, full time education for these children,
along with the supply of nutrition to each and alsosome food security to their poor
families.-lavery persists in our age in various forms. The

bonded labor

systemis one of them. (hild labour

is another kind of bonded labour. Botharise out of socioeconomic and historical

reasons
.
&ndia, the
largestdemocratic country in the world, has / million bonded childlabourers, and
0++ million adult labourers living a life of bondage andcontemporary forms of
slavery, according to our estimates. This
isdespite (onstitutional guarantees and prohibitive laws like theBonded 1abour ystem !'bolition" 'ct #$2, the (hild labour !3rohibition and 4egulation 'ct" #$%
and &nternational (onventionson the sub5ect. (hild labour !/ years to #* years of
age" is rampant notonly in agriculture but also in industries such as those
manufacturingmatches, locks, carpets, stone 6uarries, brick kilns, tanneries anddia
mond cutting and polishing units.

These children are denied their fundamental right to childhood, to education, to play
and to dreamlike a normal child. They have to labour for more than % hours
everyday. 1egal and human rights battles on their behalf have beensuccessfully
fought in the -upreme (ourt of &ndia. 3arliament too
has been approached. 7nited 8ations 9uman 4ights (ommission, &1:and 78&(E
have been sensitized. ;et, the )+ yearold struggles isonly a beginning. ' lot more
remains to be done.

II. FACTS OF THE CASE

&t would be instructive to briefly discuss the facts of the case beforedelving into the
legal issues arose
therein.The petitioner made a survey of some of the stone 6uarries inaridabad
district near the city of <elhi and found that there were alarge number of labourers
from Maharashtra, Madhya 3radesh, 7ttar 3radesh and 4a5asthan who were
working in these stone 6uarriesunder =inhuman and intolerable conditions= and
many of whom were bonded labourers. The petitioner therefore addressed a
letter to one of us on )/th ebruary, #$%) pointing out that in the mines of -hri -.1.harma, >urukula &ndra 3rastha, 3ost 'mar 8agar aridabad,<istrict, a large
number of labourers were languishing under ab5ectconditions of bondage for last
about ten years, and the petitioner gavethe names of ## bonded labourers who

were from village

'sarha,Banner district of 4a5asthan, 2 bonded labourers who were fromvillage
Bharol, district ?hansi of Madhya 3radesh and )0
bondedlabourers who were from village Barodia, Bhanger, Tehsil@hurai,district
-agar, M.3. The petitioner also annexed to its letter, statementsin original bearing
the thumb marks or signatures as the case may beof these bended labourers
referred to in the letter.The court laid down comprehensive measures for the
rehabilitationand supportive working environment of the labourers working in
mineleases. The court also directed that the 'ssistant 1abour (ommissioner and the
<eputy 1abour (ommissioner should verifywhether the nine mining lessees to whom
notice had been issued
were paying the labourers wages that was commensurate with the provisions of the
Minimum Aages 'ct. 'ccording to the facts stated

before the court the mine lessees had been repeatedly andcontinuously committed
gross violation of labour laws including non payment of minimum wages and the tate of 9aryana must consider cancellation the leases of the defaulters.
III.BROAD ISSUES EXAMINED BY THE COURT
#.Ahether 'rticle0)of the (onstitution is attracted to the
instantcase as no fundamental right of the petitioners or of theworkmen referred to
in the petition are infringed.).(an a letter addressed by a party to this (ourt be
treated as awrit petition and in the absence of any verified petition this(ourt can be
moved to exercise its writ 5urisdiction.0.<uring a proceeding under 'rticle0)of the
(onstitution,
canthis (ourt be empowered to appoint any commission or aninvestigating body to e
n6uire into the allegations made andmakes a report to this (ourt on the basis of the
en6uiry to enablethis (ourt to exercise its power and 5urisdiction under 'rticle0)of
the (onstitution.

IV. THE REASONING EMPLOYED BY THECOURT AND ITS DECISION

The substance of the grievance of the petitioners in this petition is thatthe workmen
referred to in the communication addressed to this (ourtare bonded labourers. &n
#$2, the 3arliament enacted the Bonded1abour -ystem !'bolition" 'ct, #$2 and
by virtue of the provisionsof the said 'ct, the bonded labour system has been
declared to beillegal in this country. 'ny person who is wrongfully and
illegallyemployed as a labourer in violation of the provisions of the 'ct, is inessence
deprived of his liberty. ' bonded labourer truly becomes aslave and the freedom of a

bonded labourer in the matter of hisemployment and movement is more or less

completely taken awayand forced labour is thrust upon him. Ahen any bonded
labourer approaches this (ourt, the real grievance that he makes is that heshould be
freed from this bondage and he prays for being set at libertyand liberty is no doubt
a fundamental right guaranteed to every personunder the (onstitution. There cannot
be any manner of doubt that any person who is wrongfully and illegally detained
and is deprived of hisliberty can approach this (ourt under 'rticle0)of the
(onstitutionfor his freedom from wrongful and illegal detention, and for being setat
liberty.The second ground which raises the 6uestion whether the letter addressed
by a party to this (ourt can be treated as a writ petition andin the absence of any
verified petition this (ourt can be moved
toexercise its writ 5urisdiction, is essentially an ob5ection to the procedure to be ad
opted by this (ourt in the matter of entertaining a proceeding under 'rticle0)for
enforcement of fundamental rights of the parties. 'rticle0)!#"of the (onstitution
which has been earlier set

Bonded

Labour

The existence of bonded labour is not a slur on the administration; rather it is

the failure to take note of and to make an effort to put an end to the
bonded labour system.

Justice Bhagwati in Bandhua Mukti

Morcha case

Introduction

The origin of bonded labour can be traced from the caste hierarchy and feudal
structure. In earlier times the people were divided into four categories i.e. Brahmin,
kshatriya, vaishya and shudra. Since the lower caste persons did not have enough land
to cultivate, they needed money for fulfillment of social obligations besides satisfaction
of their physiological needs and for this purpose they become indebted to the higher
caste persons. As the debtor has nothing to offer as security, the creditor demanded that
he pledges his person and work for the creditor in lieu of the redemption of debt and
interest. Guarantee of a permanent source of cheap labour on a long term basis was
the main interest of the money lender.

What is Bonded

Labour?

Bonded labour (or debt bondage) occurs when a persons labour is demanded in
return for a loan. The person is then tricked into working for little or no pay. The value
of their work is usually greater than the original loan. In many cases the loan is passed
down from parent to child. Female bonded labourers will often be subject to sexual
abuse by their employer. Around 20 million people are estimated to be in
bonded labour worldwide. Bonded labour is most likely to exist in situations of
poverty where an unexpected expense such as medical costs or a marriage dowry forces
an individual to borrow. Bonded labourers are usually unable to defend their rights or
are bound by a misplaced sense of duty to repay the debt owed by their family.
According to s.2 (e)[1], bonded labour means any labour or service rendered
under the bonded labour system. Bonded labourer under s.2(f) means a labourer
who incurs, or has, or presumed to have incurred a bonded debt.
Societal discrimination is one of the key factors behind bonded labour.
As Kiran Prasad, Director of the NGO JEEVIKA notes, Bonded labour in India is not
just an economic issue, but a social issue linked with caste. Unless we associate
bonded labour with caste, we won't understand bonded labour, and we won't find a
solution.
Bonded

labour in M.P.

In a recent article[2] there was news about an adivasi, working in Neemgaon village
in Harna district of MP as a bonded labourer. He was paid three or four kgs of wheat
everyday. His wife was paid Rs. 50 per month for housework and other chores while his
22 year old son worked for another landlord in the village. But in January, this year the
landlords horse bit off the sons nose, while he was feeding it. On May 29, the police and
district officials rescued both the father and son from the village after a complaint was
filed by an activist group Shramik Adivasi Sangathana, which basically works against
the exploitation of adivasis in the districts of Beitul, Khandwa and Harda. This is said to
be the fifth case of bonded labour that has emerged in Harda since last September.
But none of the families have been rehabilitated.

The main reason why people are working as bonded labourers was because they
were afraid to speak up and also because they were all heavily indebted to the landlords,
and therefore could not dare to go against the wishes of the landlords. Also in certain
other cases certain sums of money were borrowed for family weddings, which could
never be repaid despite long years of labour.

The Harda district in MP has a social custom called barsudiya, which is prevalent
even today. Large landowners lend money, do not charge interest, but are paid in terms

of hard work on their farms. The labourers, including many adivasis, and their
families, live on the farm and work there for a pittance.

In another case, a resident of Sangwa village asked the Sangathana to release his
sons. After his request the Sangathana filed a complaint with the collector in September
2002, demanding the release of his sons, who were working with a landlord. One of the
sons worked for 14yrs as a bonded labourer, before his release. But after there
releases, both of them are yet to find a job, though the collector as part of his duty
offered them ration cards, a place to live and loans to start business.

This case inspired yet another villager from the nearby village to register a
complaint with the Sangathana. A couple were working as bonded labourers for eight
yrs near Harda. After the death of her husband, the loan automatically got transferred to
the wife. She was rescued in April 2003, alongwith her two sons. But after coming to
Beed, both the children were not admitted to any schoolas they did not have a transfer
certificate. No government aid has been given to her till now and she doesnt even get
the widows pention of Rs.250 per month.
The government couldnt look into the matter as the labourers were mostly
working on their own will. While the administration has released bonded labourers in
Harda, there is little to follow up in terms of punitive action and rehabilitation.

The act defines bonded labour as service arising out of loan/debt/advance.

Offenders can be imprisoned up to three years and fined up to Rs. 2000.

On July 15, the SC directed 11 states to give, within a month, status, report on
bonded labourers to the National Human Rights Commission. Madhya Pradesh was
among the states which did not file a status report along with Andhra Pradesh,
Karnataka, Jharkhand, Tamil Nadu and Chattisgarh.

This slur is evident in Harda and so many other places. The question is what is being
done about it especially in regards to the rehabilitation of the bonded labourers.
Without adequate rehabilitation, those who are released will quickly fall again into
bondage

Abolition of forced

labour

Universal Declaration Of Human Rights, 1948

The Preamble of the UDHR recognizes dignity as an inherent in the human family
and as a foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. Article 1 says that all
human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. Further the general
assembly proclaimed abolition of slave labour, by articles 4,13(1). 23(1) as shown
hereunder:
Article 4[3] no one shall be held in slavery or servitude
Article 13(1) everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within
the borders of each state
Article 23(1) everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment and to
protection against employment
Article 4 of the European Convention of the Human Rights 1956 is to the same effect
and forced labour or slavery is rightly declared inhuman.

Indian Constitution

Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees the right to life and liberty. The
Indian Supreme Court has interpreted the right of liberty to include, among other
things, the right of free movement, the right to eat, sleep and work when one pleases,
the right to be free from inhuman and degrading treatment, the right to integrity and
dignity of the person, the right to the benefits of protective labor legislation, and the
right to speedy justice. The practice of bonded labour violates all of these
constitutionally-mandated rights.

Article 23 of the Constitution prohibits the practice of debt bondage and other forms
of slavery both modern and ancient. Traffic in human beings and begar and other similar
forms of forced labour are prohibited and any contravention of this provision shall be
an offence punishable in accordance with the law.
Begar is a form of forced labour under which a person is compelled to work
without receiving any remuneration. Other similar forms of forced labour were
interpreted the Supreme Court when it ruled in the Asiad Workers Case[4] that:
both unpaid and paid labour were prohibited by Article 23, so long as the element
of force or compulsion was present in the worker's ongoing services to the employer.
The Supreme Court also interpreted the term forced labour to mean providing

provides labour or service to another for remuneration which is less than minimum
wage. All labour rewarded with less than the minimum wage, then, constitutes forced
labor and violates the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court ruled that:
it is the plainest requirement of Articles 21 and 23 of the Constitution that
bonded labourers must be identified and released and on release, they must be
suitably rehabilitated.... any failure of action on the part of the State Governments in
implementing the provisions of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act would be
the clearest violation of Article 21 and Article 23 of the Constitution.
Article 24 prohibits the employment of children in factories, mines, and other
hazardous occupations. Together, Articles 23 and 24 are placed under the heading
"Right against Exploitation," one of India's constitutionally-proclaimed fundamental
rights.
Article 39 requires the state to "direct its policy toward securing":
(e) that the health and strength of workers... and the tender age of children are not
abused and that citizens are not forced by economic necessity to enter avocations
unsuited to their age or strength.
(f) that children are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner
and in conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected
against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment."
Bonded

Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976

The Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act purports to abolish all debt agreements
and obligations arising out of India's longstanding bonded labour system. It is the
legislative fulfillment of the Indian Constitution's mandate against begar and
forced labour.It frees all bonded labourers, cancels any outstanding debts against
them, prohibits the creation of new bondage agreements, and orders the economic
rehabilitation of freed bonded laborers by the state. It also criminalizes all post-act
attempts to compel a person to engage in bonded labour, with maximum penalties of
three years in prison and a 2,000 rupee fine. The Bonded Labour System (Abolition)
Act offers the following definition of the practices being abolished.
Salient Features of the Act

labour

1)

totally abolishes bonded

2)

to identify and rehabilitate bonded

3)

identify certain scheme an committees to be formed at the district level

4)

punishment of up to 3yrs imprisonment and/or fine

5)

any attachment of property of bonded laborers stands cancelled form the date

labourers

of enforcement of the act

6)
employers not to evict the bonded
provided

labourer from the accommodation

Sec. 2(e) of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 defines
bonded labour to mean any labour or service rendered under the
bonded labour system. Under s.2(f) bonded labourer means a labourer who
incurs, or has, or presumed to have incurred a bonded debt.
Sec. 2(g) "bonded labour system" means the system of forced, or partly
forced labour under which a debtor enters...or is presumed to have entered, into an
agreement with the creditor to the effect that,(i) in consideration of an advance obtained by him or by any of his lineal ascendants
or descendants (whether or not such advance is evidenced by any document) and in
consideration of the interest, if any, due on such advance, or
(ii) in pursuance of any customary or social obligation, or
(iii) in pursuance of an obligation devolving on him by succession, or
(iv) for any economic consideration received by him or by any of his lineal
ascendants or descendants, or
(v) by reason of his birth in any particular caste or community, he would(1) render, by himself or through any member of his family... labour or service to
the creditor, or for the benefit of the creditor, for a specified period or for an unspecified
period, either without wages or for nominal wages, or
(2) forfeit the freedom of employment or other means of livelihood for a specified
period or for an unspecified period, or
(3) forfeit the right to move freely throughout the territory of India, or
(4) forfeit the right to appropriate or sell at market value any of his property or
product of his labour or the labour of a member of his family or any person
dependent on him...
District magistrates/ district collectors, or deputy commissioners, in some states are
responsible for enforcement of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act. As part of
his duties, he is required by the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act to identify all
cases of bonded labour occurring in his district, free the labourers, and initiate
prosecution under the act. He is also charged with making sure available credit sources
are in place, so that freed laborers will not be forced into bondage again. Finally, the
district magistrate is to constitute and participate in the functioning of a district-level
"vigilance committee." The statutory functions of this committee are:

(a) to advise the District Magistrate . . . as to the efforts made, and action taken, to
ensure that the provisions of this act... are properly implemented;
(b) to provide for the economic and social rehabilitation of the freed
bonded labourers;
(c) to coordinate the functions of rural banks and cooperative societies with a view to
canalizing adequate credit to the freed bonded labourers;
(d) to keep an eye on the number of offences of which cognizance has been taken
under [the] act;
(e) to make a survey as to whether there is any offence of which cognizance ought to
be taken under the act;
(f) to defend any suit instituted against a freed bonded labourer or a member of his
family... for the recovery of the whole or part of any bonded debt...
Very few such vigilance committees have been formed, and Human Rights Watch
knows of no district in which such a committee is currently operative.
References to rehabilitation of freed bonded laborers occur twice in the
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act. Once in reference to the district magistrate's
duty to "secure and protect the economic interests" of the bonded laborer (Sec. 11), and
once in stipulating the vigilance committees' duty to provide for the "economic and
social rehabilitation" of the bonded laborer (Sec. 14). The act itself, however, does not
specify of what this rehabilitation should consist and left implementation of
rehabilitation up to the state governments, and largely dependent on the initiative of
District Magistrates.
In 1978, the Ministry of Labour launched a scheme that specified a "rehabilitation
allowance" in order to assist state governments with rehabilitation. Under this scheme,
the central government contributes half of the rehabilitation assistance allowance due to
every freed bonded labourer, and the state where the bonded labourer resides pays
the other half. The allowance, determined by a Ministry of Labour Planning
Commission, was originally set at 4,000 rupees. In its 1994-95 Annual Report, the
Ministry of Labour stated that funds for rehabilitation assistance would be increased
from Rs. 6,250 to Rs.10,000 for each bonded laborer, and that respective State
Governments will undertake further surveys to identify bonded labourers as may still
be in existence and report to the Government of India. The State Governments have also
agreed to undertake selective follow-up studies to assess whether rehabilitated
bonded labourers have relapsed into bondage and to set up Vigilance Committees,
wherever they are not in existence.
Judical Activism in relation to the eradication of bonded

labour

In Sanjit Ray v. State of Rajasthan[5], the SC restricted the state from

extracting labour by paying less than the minimum wages in the name of public utility
services, considering such amounts to forced labour and is violative of article 23 of the

constitution. Therefore, labour must be compensated with wages even when they are
under law compelled to render service in the larger public interest.

In Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India[6], the main issue concerned the
existence of bonded labour in the Faridabad stone quarries near the city of Delhi. It
was alleged that majority of the workers were compelled to migrate from other states,
and turned into bonded labourers. The workers were living in sub-human and
miserable conditions. A violation of various labour laws and the
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act 1976 was alleged. The SC stated that before
a bonded labour can be regarded as a bonded labourer, he must not only be
forced to provide labour to the employer but he must have also received an advance or
other economic consideration from the employer, unless he is made to provide
forced labour in pursuance of any custom or social obligation or by reason of his birth
in any particular caste or community.
Whenever it is shown that a labourer is made to provide forced labour, the court
would raise a presumption that he is required to do so in consideration of an advance or
other economic consideration received by him and he is, therefore, a bonded labourer.
But unless and until satisfactory evidence is produced for rebutting this presumption the
court must proceed on the basis that the labourer is a bonded labourer entitle to the
benefit under the provision of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. The
courts also recognized the right of bonded labourers to live with human dignity. It
read the Directive Principles of State Policy into article 21 of the constitution to make
the right to live with human dignity fruitful to the working class of the country. The
stand in the Asiad case[7] was reiterated that the state is under a constitutional
obligation to see that there is no violation of any fundamental rights of person,
particularly when he belongs to the weaker section of the community and is unable to
wage a legal battle against a strong and powerful opponent who is exploiting him. The
Central government is bound to ensure observance of social welfare and labour laws
enacted by the parliament for the purpose of securing to the workmen a life of basic
human dignity in compliance with the Directive Principles of State Policy.

In Neerja Choudhary v. State of MP[8], the main issue in this case related to the
effective rehabilitation of the released bonded labourers. The petitioners alleged that
even after a lapse of a long time 135 labourers of the Faridabad stone quarries were
not rehabilitated. They further alleged that it was the obligation on the part of the state
government to rehabilitate the bonded labourers according to the provisions of the
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act 1976 and it is the fundamental right of the
bonded labourers under article 21 of the constitution. The petitioners therefore
prayed for a direction to the state government to take steps for the economic and social
rehabilitation of the labourers who were released from the shackles of bondage. The
SC said that the plainest requirement of article 21, 23 that the bonded labourers must
be identified and released and on release, they must be suitably rehabilitated. The act

has been enacted with a view to ensuring human dignity to the bonded laborers and any
failure of action on part of the state government, in implementing the provisions of this
legislation would be the clearest violation of article 21, 23 of the Constitution. The
courts also said that it is not enough merely to identify and release bonded labourers,
but it is equally important that after identification and release, they must be
rehabilitated, because without rehabilitation, they would be driven by poverty,
helplessness and despair into serfdom once again.

In P. Sivaswamy v. State of A.P[9], the courts found that the rehabilitation money
payable under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 came down to Rs.
738/- per family. The Court observed that the assistance was certainly inadequate for
rehabilitation and unless there was effective rehabilitation the purpose of the Act would
not be fulfilled. Up-rooted from one place of bonded labour conditions the persons are
likely to be subjected to the same mischief at another place, the net result being that the
steps taken by the Supreme Court would be rendered ineffective.

In Balram and others v. State of M.P. [10], the main issue was to determine
whether the state and central governments had given the benefit of the scheme framed
under the Bonded Labourers Act (whereby each bonded labourer was to be paid Rs.
6, 250/- as rehabilitation money) to some 3949 labourers in the state. The court
directed that the Additional Collector and such, other officers who have been assigned
the responsibility of supervising rehabilitation to ensure that the full amount intended
for the freed labourers reaches them. Therefore, all such persons who were willing to
have an account opened in their respective names for facilitating credit of the amount in
such account shall have accounts opened and the money shall be credited in such
accounts. The Union of India was also directed to release adequate funds under the
Scheme to meet the liability under the Scheme framed under the
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 within four weeks to enable compliance
of the directions now made. Similar directions were also issued to the State of Madhya
Pradesh.

A public interest litigation was brought against the inhuman working conditions in
the stone quarries in Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India and others[11]. This
was primarily brought as the various directions given by the Apex Court in the 1984
petition brought by the same appellants had not been implemented by the various state
governments. It may be noted that in this case a letter addressed to this Court
complaining about prevalence of bonded labour system in Cutton, Anagpur and
Lakkaarpur areas in Haryana, was treated as a writ petition under Art. 32 of the
Constitution.The Court held that what is necessary is provision of a permanent base for
residence of the labourers, at or near the work site. This would necessitate reasonable
housing, supply of water, a reasonable provision store at hand, schooling facility, facility
of a hospital, recreational facilities and attention to the law and order problem. The
court directed the State of Haryana to attend to the needs of the workmen in a wellconsidered and systematic way and to provide them with the facilities mentioned above.

In Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India and others[12], the main issue
involved was whether the employment of the children below the age of 14 years was
violative of Article 24 and whether the omission on the part of the State to provide
welfare facilities and opportunities deprives them of the constitutional mandates
contained in Articles 45, 39(e) and (f), 21, 14 etc.?The Supreme Court while dealing with
the issue held that while exploitation of the child must be progressively banned, other
simultaneous alternatives to the child should be evolved including providing education,
health care, nutrient food, shelter and other means of livelihood with self-respect and
dignity of person. Therefore the Court ordered the Government of India to convene a
meeting of the concerned Ministers of the respective State Governments and their
Principal Secretaries holding concerned Departments, to evolve the principles and
policies for progressive elimination of employment of the children below the age of 14
years in all employments governed by the respective enactments mentioned in M.C.
Mehta's[13] case - To provide (1) compulsory education to all children either by the
industries itself or in co-ordination with it by the State Government with such timings as
is convenient to impart compulsory education, facilities for secondary, vocational
profession and higher education; (2) apart from education, periodical health check-up;
(3) nutrient food etc.; (4) entrust the responsibilities for implementation of the
principles. Periodical reported of the progress made in that behalf be submitted to the
Registry of this Court.

Thus the Supreme Court set a new constitutional standard at a time when state on
its part had completely neglected the human values. The court further remarked that the
state government is under the constitutional scheme, charged with the mission of
bringing about a new socio-economic order where there will be socio-economic justice
for everyone and equality of status and opportunity for all.

Recommendations

1. Carry out comprehensive and independent national surveys to identify the total
number of bonded labourers in the country. These surveys should include breakdowns
of dalit bonded labourers and those who have to provide forced labour for landlords
(begar).
2. All local and national officials responsible for implementing the
bonded labour laws (including District Magistrates, Vigilance Committees, the police,
etc.) must be properly trained and function effectively, so that they actively seek out
cases of bonded labour and ensure immediate release and rehabilitation, in
compliance with the law.
3. Prosecutions must be initiated against all those who use bonded labour and
against those who use intimidation and violence to retain people as bonded labourers.
The number of successful convictions and sentences passed should be published, by

state, on a regular basis.

4. Pressure states and districts to constitute and oversee bonded labour vigilance
committees, as required by the Bonded Labour (System) Abolition Act, 1976.

5. Ensure the active involvement of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
Commission in the process of identifying, releasing, and rehabilitating bonded child
laborers.

6. Launch a nationwide public awareness campaign regarding the legal prohibition

of bonded labor. This campaign should explain in simple terms what actions are legally
prohibited and what recourses and resources are available to bonded child laborers and
their families.

Conclusion
The Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act was enacted in 1976. Twenty years
later, Human Rights Watch has found that the goals of this law-to punish employers of
bonded labour and to identify, release, and rehabilitate bonded labourers-have not
been met. The bonded labour system continues to thrive.
The district-level vigilance committees, mandated by the Bonded Labour System
(Abolition) Act and constituting the key to the enforcement of the act, have not been
formed in most districts. Those that have formed tend to lie dormant or, worse yet, are
comprised of members unsympathetic to the plight of bonded laborers.
Whether for lack of will or lack of support, India's district collectors have failed
utterly to enforce the provisions of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act. The
state of Tamil Nadu has an estimated one million bonded labourers; according to the
North Arcot District Collector, these were the first charges ever brought under the act in
Tamil Nadu.
The mandated rehabilitation of released workers is essential. Without adequate
rehabilitation, those who are released will quickly fall again into bondage. This has been
established repeatedly, among both adult and child bonded laborers. Nonetheless, the
central and state governments have jointly failed to implement the required
rehabilitation procedures. Rehabilitation allowances are distributed late, or are not
distributed at all, or are paid out at half the proper rate, with corrupt officials pocketing
the difference. One government-appointed commission found that court orders
mandating the rehabilitation of bonded laborers were routinely ignored.
Finally, the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act directs vigilance committees
and district collectors to institute savings and credit programs at the community level,
so that the impoverished might have access to a small loan during financial

emergencies. This resource is crucial. Just as enforcement of the law against employers
would work to terminate the demand for bonded labour, so would available credit
work to end the supply. Nearly every child interviewed by Human Rights Watch told the
same story: they were sold to their employers because their parents were desperate for
money and had no other way to get it. For some, it was the illness or death of a parent,
for others, the marriage of a sister, and for others still, the need to buy food or put a roof
over their heads. In most cases, the amount of the debt incurred was very small.
The eradication of bonded child labor in India depends on the Indian government's
commitment to two imperatives: enforcement of the Bonded Labour System
(Abolition) Act, and the creation of meaningful alternatives for already-bonded laborers
and those at risk of joining their ranks. In addition to genuine government action, it is
essential that non-governmental organizations be encouraged by the government to
collaborate in this effort. The government has the resources and authority to implement
the law, while community-based organizations have the grass-roots contacts and trust
necessary to facilitate this implementation. Furthermore, non-governmental groups can
act as a watchdog on government programs, keeping vigil for corruption, waste, and
apathy. The elimination of current debt bondage and the prevention of new or renewed
bondage therefore requires a combination of concerted government action and extensive
community involvement. Neither standing alone is sufficient. Bonded labor is a vast,
pernicious, and long-standing social ill, and the tenacity of the bonded labor system
must be attacked with similar tenacity; anything less than total commitment is certain to
fail.
References
Menon, Meena, Escape from Bondage, The Hindu, September 7, 2003, New Delhi Ed.
Seervai, H.M., Constitutional Law of India, Vol 1, p. 894, 1983 Ed.
Jain, M.P., Indian Constiutional Law, p.42, 1978 Ed.
Text material

[1] The Bonded

Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976

[2] Menon, Meena, Escape from Bondage, The Hindu, September 7, 2003, New Delhi
Ed.
[3] Article 4.1 no one shall be held in slavery or servitude, 2. no one shall be required
to perform forced or compulsory labour, 3. for the purpose of this article the term

forced or compulsory

labour shall not include:

(a) any work required to be done in the ordinary course of detention imposed
according to the provisions of article 5 of this convention during conditional release
from such detention;
(b) any service of a military character or, in care of the conventions objectors in
countries while they are recognized, service encted instead of compulsory military
service
(c) any service exacted in case of emergency or calamity threatening the life or well
being of the community

[4] AIR 1982 S.C. 1473

[5]
[6] AIR 1984 S.C. 802
[7] AIR 1982 S.C. 1473 at p. 1482
[8] AIR 1984 S.C. 1099
[9] AIR 1988 S.C. 1863
[10] AIR 1990 S.C. 44
[11] AIR 1992 S.C. 38
[12] AIR 1997 S.C. 2218
[13] 1997 AIR S.C.W. 407

Disclaimer : The views in this article are

author's point of view.

www.manupatra.com may or may not
subscribe to the views of the author. This
article is not intended to substitute the
legal advice. No portion of this article
may be copied, retransmitted, reposted,
duplicated or otherwise used, without the
express written approval of the author.
The Copyright of the article is with the
author.