BONDED LABOUR SYSTEM

(ABOLITION) ACT, 1976

BANDHU MUKTI MORCHA
VS
UNION OF INDIA
(AIR1984SC 802)
BY: ANKIT ANAND

FACTS :
The

Petitioner was an an organisation dedicated

to the cause of release of bonded labourers.
It conducted a survey in stone quarries and
mines in Faridabad district.
It found that several workmen in these mines
were migrant workers from other States in India
who were bonded labourers.
They were living in conditions of abject poverty.
The mine owners did not provide them with
shelter, clean drinking water, latrines or medical
facilities, among other things.
The workers were also subject to respiratory
infections due to the pollution generated by stone
crushers.

CONT..
There

also existed an illegal system of

thekedars or middlemen who extracted a large
percentage of wages from the workmen as
commission.
The Petitioner, on behalf of these workmen,
addressed a letter to the Court invoking the
jurisdiction of Article 32 of the Constitution and
sought reliefs.
Among other things, reduction in air pollution,
clean and potable drinking water, conservancy
facilities, medical facilities and compensation.
A violation of variouslabourlaws and the
BondedLabourSystem (Abolition) Act 1976 was
alleged.

CONT..
The

Supreme Court treated it as Public Interest

Litigation and appointed a commission for
inquiry into the Petitioners allegations.
The Respondent-Government challenged the
petition on the ground that it was not
procedurally in accordance with the Rules of
the Supreme Court and the Code of Civil
Procedure.

DECISION AND REASONING:

On the issue of procedural infirmities, the Court held

that in the instant case, a letter could be treated as a
writ petition under Article 32.
The Court held that in matters of public interest, when
the oppressed are unable to afford legal aid, procedural
flexibility should be permitted.
On the issue of Air Pollution at the mines the Court held
that the Central Government and the State of Haryana
should take steps to ensure that it is reduced.
The Court took note of the fact that workmen were
subjected to infections like tuberculosis due to the
constant presence of dust.

Thus the Court suggested one of two measures to be

adopted in this regard-a continuous spraying of water
over the stone crusher or the installation of a dust

WATER & SANITATION

The Court directed the Central Government and the
State of Haryana to comply with these suggestions and
submit a report.
As to whether the Respondent Government was obliged
to provide clean Drinking Water to the workmen, the
Court held in the affirmative. The Court held that the
Mines Act 1952 provided that mine-lessees and stone
crusher owners shall make effective arrangements for
providing
and
maintaining
at
suitable
points
conveniently situated a sufficient supply of cool and
wholesome drinking water for all workmen.
Thus the Court directed the Respondent Government to
provide clean drinking water, the purity of which should
be on a scale of two litres for every person employed.

CONT..

The water had to be stored in hygienic containers to be

cleaned and refilled everyday and kept at accessible and
shady areas. The containers would be looked after by women
and children who would be paid a minimum wage for it.

The Respondent Government was also directed to order the

mine owners to obtain tankers of water from an unpolluted
source and supply it to the workmen at frequent intervals.

On the issue of lack of Conservancy Facilities, the Court

directed the Respondent Government to install separate
latrines and urinals for men and women in accordance with
the Mines Act 1952.

The mine owners were to ensure that the latrines were to be

in sanitary conditions and adequate in number, with a
continuous supply of water.

MEDICAL FACILITIES
As to whether Medical Facilities and first aid should be
provided to the workers the Court held in the
affirmative.
The Court held that the provisions governing health
and safety of workers in the Mines Act, 1952 and Mines
Rules 1955 are applicable. Thus the Court directed the
Respondent Government to immediately provide
adequate medical facilities to the workers.
Moreover, workers required to blast explosives were to
be trained under the Mines Vocational Training Rules
1966 and be qualified in first aid.
The Court held that families of workmen were entitled
to medical aid and reimbursement of expenses in that
regard. In case of injuries suffered at the workplace,
the workmen and/or their families were to be
hospitalized at the expense of the mine owners.

COMPENSATION & LEGAL AID

On the issue of Compensation due to injuries or diseases
suffered at the workplace, the Court held that the provisions
of the Workmens Compensation Act 1923 would prevail.
The Court held that concerned Inspecting Officer would
render legal assistance to the victim to file his or her claim
before the appropriate court.
The Court held that the lower court should dispose off the
medical claim at the earliest.
The Court held that the Respondent Government should
visit the mines every fortnight to check whether the
workmen are infected by injury or disease. If so, the
Government was directed to provide medical and legal
assistance to them.
The Court appointed a Commissioner from the Ministry of
Labour, Government of India to ensure that the Government
was carrying out the directions as laid down by the Court.

DECISION EXCERPTS / CONCLUSION

The right to live with human dignity enshrined in Article

21 derives its life breath from the Directive Principles of
State Policy and particularly Clauses (e) and (f) of Article
39 and Articles 41 and 42 and therefore, it must include
protection of the health and strength of workers men and
women, and of the tender age of children against abuse,
opportunities and facilities for children to develop in a
healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity,
educational facilities, just and humane conditions of work
and maternity relief.
These are the minimum requirements which must exist in
order to enable a person to live with human dignity and no
State neither the Central Government nor any State
Government has the right to take any action which will
deprive a person of the enjoyment of these basic essentials.

 Article

21 of the Constitution of India guarantees the right to life

and liberty. The practice of bondedlabourviolates 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 andbegarand other similar forms of
forcedlabourare prohibited and any contravention of this provision
shall be an offence punishable in accordance with the law.

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.

BONDED LABOUR SYSTEM(ABOLITION) ACT,1976

Objective:
The object of the Act is to provide for the
abolition of bonded labour system with a view to
preventing
the
economic
and
physical
exploitation of the weaker sections of the
people and for matters connected therewith or
incidental thereto.
System of Bonded Labour:
It is outcome of customary obligations, forced
labour, beggar or indebtedness under which a
debtor agrees to render service.

WHO IS BONDED LABOUR?

According to the definition given in section 2(g) of the Act,
bonded
labour
means
service
arising
out
of
loan/debt/advance.
It represents the relationship between a creditor and a
debtor wherein the debtor undertakes to mortgage his
services or the services of any of his family members to the
creditor
for a specified or unspecified period with or without wages
accompanied by denial of choice of alternative avenues of
employment, or to deny him freedom of movements, then the
person would normally be covered under the definition of a
bonded labour.

BONDAGE:
The aggrieved person or any person on his behalf can
approach to the District Magistrate who is chairman of
the Vigilance Committee constitute under the Act.

He has been entrusted with certain duties and

responsibilities for implementing the provisions of the
Act.
Matter can also be brought to the notice of the Sub
Divisional Magistrate of the area or any other person
who is a member of the Vigilance Committee of District
or Sub-division.

RELIEF AVAILABLE TO THE VICTIM:

The bonded labour is to immediately released from the
bondage.
His liability to repay bonded debt is deemed to have
been extinguished.
Freed bonded labour shall not be evicted from his
homesteads or other residential premises which he was
occupying as part of consideration for the bonded
labour.
A rehabilitation grant of Rs. 1 20,000/- to each of the
bonded labour is to be granted and assistance for his
rehabilitation provided.

PENALTIES:
The offence under the Act is cognizable and bailable.
Any person who is contravenes provisions of the act is
punishable with imprisonment for a term which may
extend to three years and also with a fine which may
extend to two thousand rupees.

SALIENT FEATURES OF THE ACT:

1)Totally abolishes bondedlabour.
2)To identify and rehabilitate bondedlabourer.
3) Identify certain scheme on 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 of enforcement of the act.
6) Employers not to evict the bondedlabourer from the
accommodation provided.

18