A PROJECT ON

“Case Study- Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs UOI ”

Submitted to

Mr. Rajwant Rao

(ASST. PROFESSOR OF LAW)
SUBMISSION DATE:- 07/04/2018

Submitted By:

Aniket Upadhyay

ROLL NO. – MU13BBALLB30

Public Interest Lawyering

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

For nearly involved in this project, over the one month spent researching and writing this synopsis has
been helpful. Many have been extraordinarily generous with time, information and counsel. With
pleasure, I could dedicate a paragraph to them. But I shall hope that each of the individuals and
institutions named will appreciate the extent and warmth of our gratitude to them.

Institutions

The library and the IT staff of MATS Law School, Raipur who helped us during the entire period, with e-
articles and other materials for the accomplishment of this project work.

Individuals

These are divided into several groups, beginning with those friends, colleagues, and mentors who
supported me all through the work. In no particular order, they are: our honourable faculty, Mr. Rajwant
Rao, Sir and my friends.

2
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Scope and Limitations:

The researcher has used the doctrinal method and has relied on the secondary sources for the content of
the research paper. Owing to the large number of topics that could be included in the project, the scope of
this research paper is exceedingly vast. However in the interest of brevity, this paper has been limited to
the topics which deal with the “ Case Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs UOI”.

Sources of Data:

I have relied on the following secondary sources of data:

 Articles
 websites

Method of Writing

The method of writing followed in this project is both analytical and descriptive.

3
 Table Of Content

S. No. Topic Page No.

1. Case Note 5
2. Fact 5-6
3. Issues 6
4. Contention Of Petitioners 6
5. Direction Of The Court 7
6. Findings Of The Report 7-8
7. Judgment 8
8. Related Article & Act 8-9

4
 Bandhua Mukti Morcha Vs UOI

Appellants: Bandhua Mukti Morcha

vs
Respondent: Union of India (UOI) and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges:

o P.N.BHAGAWATI, R.S.PATHAK, AMARENDRS NATH

o K. RAMASWAMY, S. SAGHIRAHMAD
o RANGANATH MISRA, C.J., M.M. PUNCHHI AND S.C. AGRAWAL, JJ

Case Note

Constitution - bonded labour - Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 - petition filed
complaining about prevalence of bonded labour system in Haryana wherein stone quarry workers
were living in most inhuman conditions - Court appointed Commissioners to inquire into matter -
Court issued directions to State and Central Government on basis of report of Commissioners
and appointed another Commissioner to inquire whether directions being followed by mines
lessees and stone crusher owners - report of Commissioner indicated that enforcement of Act not
adequate and no substantial steps taken for implementation of Court's directives - direction
issued to State to ensure improved conditions of service and facilities to workmen engaged in
bonded labour.

Facts Of The Case

 A letter addressed to this Court complaining about prevalence of bonded labour system in
Cutton, Anangpur and Lakkarpur areas of Faridabad District in Haryana State wherein
the stone quarries workers are living in most inhuman conditions.

5
  A letter addressed to the Court complaining about prevalence of bonded labour system to
stop employment of children in Carpet Industry in the State of Utter Pradesh; to appoint a
Committee to investigate into the matter.

 Most of them are from M.P., U.P., Maharashtra, Rajasthan, and Bihar.

 These letters are treated as a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution.

 These writs were treated as a Public Interest Litigation.

 This writ was filed to prohibit the employment of children below 14 years of age and to
give them facilities like education, health, sanitation, nutritious foods etc.

Main Issues Of The Case

 (i) whether an application under Article 32 of the Constitution was maintainable,

particularly when no allegation of infringement of petitioner's fundamental right was
made;

 (ii) whether a letter addressed to the Court could be treated as a writ petition and be
proceeded with in the absence of support by affidavit or verification; and

 (iii) whether the Court had power to appoint Commissioners or an investigative body to
inquire into allegations made in the petition and by affidavits and require reports to be
made to the Court for facilitating exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 32 of the
Constitution

Contention Of Petitioners

 The main contention of the petitioner group is that employment of the children in any
industry or hazardous industry is violation of art. 24

 That these poor unfortunate workmen who lead a miserable existence in small hovels,
exposed to the vagaries of weather, drinking foul water, breathing heavily dust-laden
polluted air and breaking and blasting stone all their life,

 They are being treated as slaves and are subject to physical torture.

6
Directions Of The Court

 After looking into the matter court appointed advocates to personally visit to stone
quarries and carpet industries and report to court about the conditions in which workers
are living and to ;

 Whether children are being exploited or not

 On the basis of this report the petitions were raised

Findings Of The Report

 Discloses the enormity of the problems to which the children are subjected and stated that

 Freedom is not only the monopoly of a few but belongs to them all and that they are also
equally entitled along with others to participate in the fruits of freedom and development.

 According to the report court has given certain directions which are summarized as
follows:-

 identification of bonded labour,

 release of bonded labour ,
 rehabilitation of the freed bonded labourers,
 ensuring minimum wages to them,
 organize periodic camps to educate the workmen about the rights and benefits
conferred upon them by social welfare and labour laws,
 Provide adequate medical and first aid facilities,
 workman who is required to carry out blasting with explosives should be trained,
 Inspecting Officers to carry out surprise checks to ensure the enforceability of all
the provisions,
 arrangement for continuous spraying of water and installation of dust sucking
machine,
 start obtaining drinking water from any unpolluted source or sources of supply
and to transport it by tankers to the work site ,
 Drinking water vessels shall be kept in clean and hygienic condition.

7
  The Inspecting Officer of the Central Government as also of the State
Government will visit each stone quarry or stone crusher at least once in a
fortnight and ascertain whether there is any workman who is injured or who is
suffering from any disease or illness and what arrangements are made for him/her.

Judgment

Court's judgment to regulate such matters has inherent limitations. These are not schemes which
could be conveniently monitored by a court - far less can the apex court keep track of the matter.
To get attention for a matter of this type from the Court is bound to take some time. Human
problems in their normal way do not wait for a time schedule for attention. In such
circumstances, it should be the obligation of the State which on account of running stone quarries
within its area must in various ways be getting benefits to look after these aspects. As a welfare
State it is now the obligation of the State to cater to these requirements of the area.

Related Articles & Acts

 Labour Law; Constitution of India - Articles 21, 23, 24, 32, 38, 39, 42, 43, 45, 47 and
48A

 Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 - Section 13;

 Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970;

 Inter-State Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service)

Act, 1979;

 Minimum Wages Act, 1948;

 Maternity benefit act,1961;

 Article 21-protection of life and personal liberty.

 Article 23-prohibition of traffic in human beings and child labour.

 Article 24- prohibition of employment of children in factories etc.

 Article 32- remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this part.

8
 Article 38-state to secure a social order for the promotion of welfare of the workers.

 Article 39 – certain principles of policy to be followed by the state.

 Article 42- provision for just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief.

 Article 43- living wage etc., for workers.

 Article 45- provision for early childhood care and education to children below the age of
six years.

 Article 47- duty of state to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to
improve public health.

9
Conclusion-
In the given case, the court had protected the rights of bonded labours which are
hampered by the various several industries. The court following the M.C.Mehta vs State
of Karnataka where the court make the strict guidelines that children below 14years will
not work at factories, industries or other hazardeous places. So in this case the court not
only focused on children below 14 years but also the bonded labours. Hence this case
accepted as PIL and gave a landmark judgement as a part of Judicial Activism.

10