BANDHUA MUKTI MORCHA V. UNION OF INDIA

 

 

BANDHUA MUKTI MORCHA V. UNION OF INDIA

(AIR 1984 SC 802)

 

 

Judges

Hon’ble Justice N. Bhagwati;

Hon’ble Justice S. Pathak;

Hon’ble Justice Amarnath Sen

 

Issues

After the comprehensive and well documented report of Dr. Patwardhan was submitted before the court, Apex Court framed following issues:

1.       Whether the Writ Petition is maintainable, or not?

2.       Whether there was any abrogation of Fundamental Right or not?

3.       Whether the Apex Court has the power to appoint a commission or not?

4.     Whether the provisions of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 can be attracted in the present matter?

5.     Whether the implementation of various social welfare legislations for workers are disputed or not?

Judgement

The Court discussed the importance of safeguarding children's privileges or rights to education, security, and health, as well as the improvement of India as a democratic country, in its decision. While the Court recognised that a child's work could not be promptly annulled due to financial constraints, it determined that practical efforts might be made to protect and advance the rights of adolescents among India's impoverished and underprivileged populations. 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 also noted India's obligations under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child to provide free basic education to all children in the country and to protect children from financial exploitation. The Court referred to and merged requests to the states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar in M.C. Mehta v. Province of Tamil Nadu and Ors.[ii] to nullify child labour work. The requests included advising states on how to develop plans to logically dispose of the labour of children under the age of 14; providing mandatory training to all children employed in processing plants, mining, and other enterprises; ensuring that the children receive supplement-rich nutrition; and regulating periodic health registration.Article 32 (2) includes within its matrix, power to issue any direction, order or writs which may be appropriate for the enforcement of the fundamental right in question and this is made amply clear by the inclusive nature of the clause which refers to writ in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari. Therefore SC has the power to appoint Commission for enquiry.It is a fundamental right of everyone in this country, assured under the interpretation given to Art. 21 by this Court in Francis Mullin’s case to live with human dignity, free from exploitation.This right to live with human dignity enshrined in Art. 21 derives its life breath from the Directive Principle of State Policy and particularly clause (e) and (f) of Art. 39 and Art. 41 andArt42 and at the least, therefore, it must include protection of the health and strength of the 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 as humane conditions of work and maternity relief.

These are the minimum requirements that must exist in order to enable a person to live with human dignity, and no State- neither the Central Government- has the right to take any action which will deprive a person of the enjoyment of these basic essentials.

 

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. The Court in Neerja Chaudhari v. State of M.P[2] enumerated the importance of the abolition of bonded labour by stating that, it is not enough merely to identify and release bonded labour it is important that they must be rehabilitated because without rehabilitation they would be driven to poverty, helplessness, and despair thus into serfdom once again.