Rights

This article is written by Syed Owais Khadri. It attempts to provide a detailed understanding of Article 24 of the Constitution which prohibits child labour. The article covers all aspects of child labour and Article 24. It covers the legislations, judgements delivered, schemes and projects undertaken to give effect to the Constitutional provision. It also sheds light upon the international commitment of India on the subject of child labour.

Introduction

A lot of us in recent times have been coming across the news about the exploitation of house help in the country, especially the female and the young house help. Numerous children and young women due to various obvious reasons, poverty being one among them, are usually forced to work at various places such as factories and as maids in households. This employment or work often comes with a lot of exploitation which goes unnoticed and unaddressed most of the time. Although there is a fundamental right guaranteed against exploitation, lack of awareness along with lack of implementation and resources is one of the major reasons why numerous individuals are exploited for labour and other purposes.

Fundamental Rights are an important facet of the Indian Constitution. They are also a part of the basic structure of the Constitution as it has been held in Kesavananda Bharathi v. State of Kerala (1973). Part III of the Constitution which consists of around 27 Articles guarantees six primary Fundamental Rights under various heads. These rights include the Right to Equality (Article 14), the Right to freedom (Article 19), the Right against exploitation (Articles 23 and 24), the Right to freedom of Religion (Articles 25 – 28), Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29 and 30) and the Right to Constitutional Remedies (Article 32). All of these rights are of great importance and hold significant value in ensuring the protection of civil liberties. 

Download Now

The Right against exploitation is an important fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution which not only ensures the protection of civil liberties but also protects from the exploitation of individuals for various purposes such as trafficking, forced labour etc. The Right against exploitation is discussed under Articles 23 and 24 of the Constitution. Article 23 prohibits the practices of human trafficking and forced labour and Article 24 provides for the prohibition of child labour. This article deals with child labour in India in light of Article 24 of the Constitution. The article delves into the policies formulated in furtherance of the fundamental right guaranteed under the aforementioned Article and various other steps that have been taken to eliminate child labour. The article also looks into the various rulings of the High Courts and the Apex Court.

Child Labour in India

Child labour has been one of the most concerning social issues in India for a very long time but it has now been reduced to a great extent due to the efforts and measures taken by the various organs of the government. The figure of children engaged in child labour has been reduced to 43.5 lakh in the 2011 census from 1.2 crore in the 2001 census which is a remarkable achievement for the nation. However, we still have a long way to go and become a country where we have zero tolerance for child labour.

The first committee to address the issue of child labour was constituted in 1979 which was called the Gurupadaswamy committee. The committee examined the issue in detail and made various recommendations accordingly. The committee highlighted poverty as one of the main reasons for the rampant child labour across the country. As a result of recommendations made by this committee, the first legislation on child labour, the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act was enacted in 1986. Since then numerous measures have been taken to tackle the issue which have been significantly successful. The Supreme Court of India in M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu (1996) noted the enormity of the issue of child labour in the country and observed that the issue had to be dealt in broad manner as a national issue.

Meaning of exploitation

Exploitation means taking unjust or unfair advantage of resources or labour to a large extent. It can be also termed as misuse.

Merriam-Webster defines exploitation as “an act or instance of exploiting” and ‘exploiting’ according to the dictionary refers to “to make use of meanly or unfairly for one’s own advantage”. Therefore summing up the definition, the term exploitation can be defined as the act or instance of making unfair use for one’s advantage.

Collins dictionary defines exploitation as “selfish utilisation”.

The Cambridge Dictionary defines exploitation as “the act of using someone unfairly for your own advantage”.

The Oxford Learner’s Dictionary defines exploitation as “a situation in which someone treats someone else in an unfair way, especially in order to make money from their work”.

Legal Definition

According to Explanation 1 of Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the term exploitation includes “any act of physical exploitation or any form of sexual exploitation, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude, or the forced removal of organs.” Although the provision talks about exploitation in the context of the trafficking of a person, the general meaning of exploitation under Articles 23 and 24 is the same.

The legal framework in furtherance of Article 24

Article 24 of the Indian Constitution is a child labour prohibiting provision which states that no child below 14 years of age shall be employed in any factory, mine or any hazardous occupation. This particular provision was assumed to be a right that would hardly be effective in the absence of legislation prohibiting and penalising its violation. This general assumption and understanding was changed in the case of the People’s Union for Democratic Rights and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors (1982). The Apex Court in this case held that Article 24 must operate proprio vigore, which means that the provision must operate independently by itself, even in the absence of any legislation in furtherance of it. 

Although the Apex Court clarified the independent operation of the provision in the above-mentioned case, it is necessary to acknowledge the fact that there are other constitutional provisions accompanying or aiding Article 24, either expressly or impliedly. In addition to the constitutional provisions, other statutory provisions and separate legislation are also available that prohibit and penalise child labour and is in furtherance of Article 24.

Constitutional Provisions

As mentioned earlier, there are few other constitutional provisions that expressly or impliedly aid Article 24 of the Constitution. The directive principles of state policy which are mentioned in Part IV of the Constitution, are a few such provisions that complement the fundamental rights and therefore can be linked to it. Some of the provisions which aid or accompany the right against exploitation or prohibition of child labour are as follows.

Article 39

Article 39 of the Constitution which directs the state to frame policies securing economic welfare of the citizens and providing sufficient sources of subsistence to the people is a significant provision that aids or accompanies Article 24. The provision under Clauses (e) and (f) expressly discusses the prevention of exploitation of children and their protection.

  • Clause (e) of the Article directs the state to formulate a policy ensuring the prevention of forced labour of every citizen including children of tender age. It provides for the prevention of abuse of such children. 
  • Clause (f) of the Article explicitly mentions the protection of childhood and youth against exploitation and moral and material abandonment.

Articles 21, 21A and 45

Article 21A can be considered as a Constitutional provision that impliedly or indirectly goes with Article 24 of the Constitution. Article 21A recognises the right to education as a fundamental right. According to this Article, the state shall provide for free and compulsory education of children aged 6 to 14 years. 

Article 45 provides for childhood care and education to children below 6 years of age. This provision was amended in 2002 with the introduction of Article 21A. The provision before the amendment was similar to Article 21A as it provided for education to children until the completion of 14 years of age.

Therefore, Articles 21A and 45 can be collectively understood as indirectly calling for the prohibition of child labour by promoting the education of children.

Similarly, Article 21 can also be construed as an aiding provision to Article 24 due to its wide scope which has been enlarging over the past few decades. It is important to note that the right to education which was provided under Article 21A, before its introduction in 2002, was recognised as a part of the Right to life under Article 21 by the Supreme Court in Unnikrishnan, J.P. v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1993). Therefore Article 21 is a significant provision that can be considered as an aiding provision to Article 24.

Statutory Provisions in pursuance of Article 24 of the Indian Constitution

The fundamental right of children against employment guaranteed under Article 24 of the Constitution is assisted by various statutory provisions that have been enacted by the legislature to give effect to the Constitutional provision. The Parliament has in fact enacted a separate legislation particularly dealing with the issue of Child labour. In addition to the specific legislation on child labour, various other provisions from different legislations such as the Factories Act, 1948, Mines Act, 1952 etc., prohibit the employment of children. Besides, A National policy has been formulated by the central government which consists of an action plan to tackle the issue of child labour in India.

The Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986

The Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 is the most significant statute in the direction of prohibition of child labour which was enacted based on the recommendations made by the Gurupadaswamy Committee. It is the primary legislation that is enacted to prohibit and penalise child labour and exploitation of children. Section 3 of this Act completely prohibits the exploitation and employment of children below 14 years of age and restricts the employment of children between 14 to 18 years of age in certain hazardous occupations. Some of the important characteristics of the Act are as follows.

  • One of the most important provisions of this Act is that it clearly defines an adolescent and a child under Sections 2(i) and 2(ii) respectively and therefore differentiates between the both. Section 2(i) defines adolescent as any person above 14 years and below 18 years of age whereas Section 2(ii) defines the term child as any person who is below 14 years of age.
  • Section 3 prohibits employment of children completely with only two exceptions and Section 3A prohibits employment of an adolescent in hazardous occupations. The two exceptions laid down by Section 3 include non-hazardous family enterprises and the music industry and industry of other art forms and sports except circus. 
  • The Act penalises the exploitation of children and the practice of child labour. Section 14 of this Act imposes penalties for violation of Sections 3 and 3A of the Act. It provides for imprisonment of 6 months to two years or a fine of twenty to fifty thousand rupees or both in case of violating either of the two provisions mentioned above. It also provides for imprisonment of 1 year to 3 years for repeat offenders.
  • It provides for health and safety measures including weekly rest that must be ensured while employing children and adolescents in permitted occupations.
  • The legislation under Section 14B establishes a fund for the rehabilitation and welfare of the children rescued from child labour.
  • Furthermore, the statute mandates the maintenance and preservation of records containing information regarding the children and adolescents employed along with the nature of work, working hours etc under Section 11. The statute also provides for the appointment of inspectors under Section 17 who are empowered to inspect the premises of occupations and to examine the records under Section 11.

National Policy on Child Labour

The National Policy on Child Labour was formulated for the first time in August 1987 after the enactment of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act of 1986. The policy contains an action plan for tackling child labour in the country. The formulated policy consists of 3 main aspects which include the following.

  1. A legislative action plan for the strict enforcement of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 to prohibit the employment of children in various occupations and to regulate the working conditions for children who are employable under the Act.
  2. Constitution of a core group by the Ministry of Labour and Employment for the convergence of various programmes and schemes formulated by the government for the welfare of the children and the upliftment of their families. The Convergence strategy includes the involvement of various ministries with different roles.
  3. Project-based plan of action for the welfare of children in areas of high concentration of child labour. The National Child Labour Project (NCLP) Scheme is one such project launched by the government.

Both, Central as well as state governments by adopting cooperative federalism, have been taking significant steps and measures to tackle the issue of child labour. While the state government carries out the task of enforcing the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act by conducting inspections and raids, the Central government monitors the enforcement of the Act and aids the state government with the help of the core group of convergence.

Other statutory provisions

In addition to separate legislation enacted for the prohibition of child labour, there are numerous provisions across various legislations that prohibit the employment and exploitation of children in certain hazardous and non-hazardous occupations and businesses. A few of such provisions are as follows.

Besides these provisions in the legislations enacted by the Union Legislature, several other state legislations also contain provisions prohibiting child labour.

International treaties against child labour

The international community after the Second World War has given great significance to the protection of human rights. As a result, it has, from time to time recognised the importance of protecting children against exploitation and therefore ensuring the protection of children’s rights; The same has been highlighted in a few significant multilateral international agreements or treaties. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Convention on the Rights of the Child and the two Conventions adopted by the International Labour Organisation namely the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 and the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 are some of the important international instruments on child rights and child labour.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948

The first and foremost international document concerning child rights, or human rights in general is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) that was adopted in 1948 with the aim of protection of human rights across the globe. Although the document does not expressly mention the rights of children against exploitation or prohibition of child labour, the significance of this instrument cannot be disregarded. It is because the Universal Declaration of Human Rights serves as a guiding light in respect of human rights. As a consequence of UDHR or in furtherance to it, several other international treaties have been adopted that focus only on particular groups of people such as women, children, refugees etc. Some of the provisions of UDHR which discuss child rights include Articles 4, 25 and 26. 

  • Article 4 does not particularly focus on children but provides for the right of every individual against exploitation. It prohibits slavery, slave trade or servitude. 
  • Article 25(2) provides that special care and assistance should be given to childhood and motherhood. It states that every child must enjoy the same social protection.
  • Article 26 is similar to Articles 21A and 45 of the Indian Constitution. It recognises every individual’s right to education. It states that Education must be free and compulsory at least till the elementary and fundamental stages.

Therefore, though the Universal Declaration of Human Rights does not particularly focus on child rights or the prohibition of child labour, it lays down a foundation for the adoption of other treaties and agreements on the protection of human rights for particular groups.

International Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989

As mentioned above, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights led the way for the adoption of other international conventions on the protection of the rights of particular groups. The International Convention on the Rights of the Child is one such convention that has been adopted in furtherance of UDHR for the protection of the rights of children. The International Convention on the Rights of the Child (ICRC) is the first international document that came into existence, particularly for the protection of child rights. It was adopted on 20th November 1989 and it came into force on 2nd September 1990. The Convention in its entirety focuses on the protection of child rights and provides for the same through various provisions of it. Different provisions provide for the protection of different rights of the child. Some of the significant provisions of the Convention are as follows.

  • Article 3 of the Convention states that the best interests of children should be of primary consideration in all actions concerning children.
  • Article 19 of the Convention directs the state parties to take appropriate measures for protecting children against all forms of violence, abuse, negligence, maltreatment or exploitation.
  • Article 28 of the Convention is similar to Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Articles 21A and 45 of the Indian Constitution. It provides for children’s right to education. The Article directs the state parties to recognise the right of the child to education and to make primary education compulsory and free to all.
  • Article 32 of the Convention explicitly focuses upon the child’s right against exploitation and prohibition of child labour. The provision directs the state parties to recognise the right of the child to be protected from economic exploitation and from engaging in any work that may harm the child’s overall growth and education and is hazardous. 
  • Article 34 requires the States to ensure the protection of children from all forms of sexual exploitation and abuse.
  • Article 35 calls for appropriate national and international steps to prevent the trafficking of children.
  • Article 36 provides for the protection of children from all other forms of exploitation which impact their welfare. 
  • Article 39 of the Convention calls for appropriate measures to ensure the physical and psychological recovery of a child victim of any form of abuse or exploitation.

The Convention is an important and substantial international document on the subject of child rights which provides for some of the significant rights of children. It recognises various rights of children against all forms of exploitation and calls for measures to ensure the protection of the child’s rights and their proper overall growth and development. 

Conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO)

The two conventions adopted by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) are the most concrete and significant international documents that focus solely on the subject of child labour and the employment of children. The two conventions adopted are namely 

  1. The Convention C138, The Minimum Age Convention, 1973; and
  2. The Convention C182, The Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999.

India is the 170th member nation of the ILO to agree to Convention No. 138 which directs the state parties to decide a minimum age for employment of children or young persons and It has also agreed to Convention No. 182 which calls for the elimination of worst forms of child labour.

The Minimum Age Convention, 1973

The Minimum Age Convention, Convention No. 138 was adopted by the International Labour Organisation in Geneva in 1973. The Convention lays down the minimum age for children to be employed. The Convention segregates different age groups and provides for limited employment of children depending upon the age. Some of the important provisions of the Convention are as follows.

  • Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention prohibit forced child labour and give the general principle that the minimum age for employment shall not be less than the age of 15 or that of compulsory schooling or primary education. 
  • Article 3 of the Convention lays down 18 years as the minimum for employment of any work which is likely to risk the health or safety of any young person.
  • Article 6 states that this convention does not apply to work done by children in school for educational or technical learning. It further allows the employment of children above 14 years of age following the conditions laid down by the competent authority.
  • Article 7 of the Convention permits the employment of children belonging to 13 to 15 years of age for light work which does not in any way harm the health and development of the child and affect the education of the child. 

The Convention provides a general idea of the minimum age that should be taken into consideration for the employment of children. It is the first and most fundamental instrument on child labour as it specifically focuses upon that particular subject and It is also the first and foremost international instrument adopted for children as it came into existence before the adoption of the International Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989.

The Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999

Convention No. 182 adopted by the International Labour Organisation for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour in 1999 is the second most significant Convention on the subject of child labour after the one adopted on minimum age in 1973. The Preamble of the Convention states that there is a need for a new instrument for the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour that would serve as a complement to the Minimum Age Convention adopted in 1973 which remains a fundamental instrument on child labour. Article 2 of the Convention states that any person below 18 years of age would be considered a child. As the preamble suggests, this instrument focuses on the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour. Some of the key provisions of the Convention are as follows.

  • Article 3 of the Convention says that the worst forms of child labour include various acts such as slavery or servitude, trafficking, forced or compulsory labour, use of children for illegal activities such as drug production and trafficking, child pornography or prostitution or any work that is likely to cause harm to the health, safety or morals of children.
  • Articles 6 and 7 of the Convention direct the state parties to take appropriate measures to eliminate the worst forms of child labour as the priority. Article 7 further states that the member states must also focus on rescuing the children, providing free education etc.

The Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention is an important document as is the primary instrument that expressly calls for the abolition and elimination of child labour. The fact that the instrument is binding on the member states makes it more significant as it allows the state parties to take necessary action without any unjustifiable delay.

Both the Conventions adopted by the International Labour Organisation are remarkable instruments that recognise the need for the protection of children from exploitation and the elimination of the evil practice of child labour.

The Minimum Age (Industry) Convention (Revised), 1937

The Minimum Age (Industry) Convention was Convention No. 59 adopted by the ILO.

Article 2 of the Convention states that children below 15 years of age shall not be employed in any public or private industrial undertaking.

Important case laws

The Indian legal arena has witnessed several reforms recognising the importance of protection of human rights from time to time and the courts have played a crucial role in that process. Likewise, the Indian courts have played a crucial role in the protection of children from exploitation and forced child labour. The judiciary has from time to time highlighted the magnitude of child labour and its causes and impacts. Some of the important judgements of the courts are as follows.

People’s Union for Democratic Rights and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors, 1982 (Asiad Workers’ Case)

The Asiad Workers’ case was a PIL (Public Interest Litigation) before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India for the enforcement of various provisions of labour laws concerning the workmen employed for the construction of various projects during the Asian Games. 

A brief outline of the Asiad Workers’ case

  • India was hosting the Asian Games that take place periodically in different parts of Asia and therefore several construction projects were undertaken by the Government of India which included the construction of flyovers, swimming pools, hotels, Asian Games village complex etc. The construction projects were allotted to various authorities such as the Delhi Development Authority, Delhi Administration and the New Delhi Municipal Committee.
  • The Authorised authorities had hired contractors who were registered as principal employers under Section 7 of the Contract Labour (Abolition and Regulation) Act, 1970 to carry out the construction of the projects.
  • The Contractors subsequently hired workers/labourers through jamadars. The Jamadars brought the workers from various parts of the country such as Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Orissa and got them employed under the contracts.
  • There were violations of several labour laws including the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976. There was also a violation of Article 24 of the Constitution as the employers had employed children below 14 years of age for the construction work.
  • The Petitioners alleged that there was severe violation of various laws and the workers were not even provided with proper living conditions, medical and other facilities. They pointed out that the violations resulted in the exploitation of workers employed for the construction work.
  • The Petitioners pointed out the aforementioned violations relying upon the report of a team of three social scientists and who filed a PIL before the Hon’ble Supreme Court for the enforcement of labour laws. 

Key legal issues

Whether there was a violation of Article 24 of the Constitution and other provisions of various labour laws?

Judgement

The Hon’ble Supreme Court, relying upon the affidavit filed by the Union Government, observed a violation of several provisions of various labour laws by private individuals, i.e., the contractors but not by the state. The Court observed that whenever any work is carried out by the government either departmentally or through contractors, the governmental authorities including the public sector corporations must take care that the provisions of the labour laws are strictly followed without any violation.

The Court about the violation of the Employment of Children Act, 1938, upheld the respondent’s contention that construction activity is unfortunately not included under the schedule of the Act. But the Court held that the omission must be set right by the government immediately. The Court further held that construction work is a hazardous occupation and therefore the employment of children below 14 years of age must be prohibited. The Court observed that it would align with provisions of Convention 59 of the ILO which has been ratified by India.

Furthermore, the Court held that apart from the aforementioned International Convention, Article 24 of the Indian Constitution provides that no child below 14 years of age shall be employed in any hazardous occupation. The court held that Article 24 as a constitutional provision must operate proprio vigore (independently) even in the absence of any appropriate legislation prohibiting the employment of children in construction work which is certainly a hazardous occupation.

Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, 1997

This case is a PIL filed by an NGO before the Hon’ble Supreme Court seeking to issue a writ of mandamus directing the state government to stop child labour in the carpet industry in the state of Uttar Pradesh.

Brief facts

  • The Petitioners through the instant PIL contend that the employment of children below 14 years of age in any industry is violative of Article 24 of the Constitution.
  • The petitioners contend that the carpet weavers across the state, especially in Varanasi, Mirzapur, Jaunpur and Allahabad have employed children in the carpet industry resulting in a violation of the fundamental right of the children guaranteed under Article 24 of the Constitution.
  • The Court appointed a committee in August 1991 to visit various places across the state, particularly those mentioned by the petitioners to find out whether the children were being exploited. The committee submitted its report in November 1991.
  • The report highlighted the large-scale exploitation to which the children were subjected and it said that the children were wrongfully forced to work as bonded labour in the carpet industry against their wishes.
  • The findings of the report said that children ranging from the age of 5 to 12 years were kidnapped from Bihar and were made to work in the carpet industry in Uttar Pradesh.
  • The report highlighted that 42% of the workforce in 882 carpet weaving looms was of children below 14 years of age. The report further said that 95% of those children belonged to the tender age of 6 to 11 years.
  • Furthermore, the committee found that the children were made to work all day and were treated as slaves. The report also highlighted that the children were subjected to physical torture which was evident by the marks of violence. 

Issues

  1. Whether the employment of children below 14 years of age is violative of Article 24 of the Constitution?
  2. Whether the omission on the part of the state to provide the facilities and opportunities to the children is a deprivation of constitutional mandates provided under Articles 45, 39(e) and (f), 21 and 14?

Judgement

The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the exploitation of childhood is detrimental to the democracy as well as the social stability, unity and integrity of the nation. The Court in this judgement stressed the causes of child labour and the impact of it on a child’s growth and development. The Court referred to various provisions of different international instruments on human and child rights, child labour etc., including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Convention on the Rights of the Child.  It also highlighted the widened scope of Article 21 which has been expanded to include various rights as fundamental rights including the right to education, right to health etc.

The Court held that it is binding upon the state to provide all the facilities and opportunities provided under various Articles of the Constitution; particularly under Article 39(e) and (f). The Court observed that a total ban on child labour would be unrealistic and counterproductive. Therefore, it has to be eliminated through well-planned development, poverty alleviation and employment of children. It further observed that constructive and realistic steps and actions are necessary to be taken to ensure that the children from poor, marginalised and weaker sections of society are allowed to reform and develop their personalities educationally, intellectually and culturally along with the enjoyment of leisure. 

The Court held that child labour has to be progressively banned while evolving simultaneous alternatives such as providing education, health facilities, nutrient food, shelter and other means of livelihood with self-respect and dignity of person. The court affirmed the observations made in M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu (1996).

M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1996 (Child labour matter)

The instant case is a  petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by Mr. M.C. Mehta, a lawyer after the fundamental right of children under Article 24 of the Constitution was violated as children were employed in the cracker and firework industry in Sivakasi.

Brief facts

  • The Petitioner, who is a lawyer, filed a petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution after noticing that the fundamental right of the children guaranteed by Article 24 of the Constitution was violated.
  • The petition was then disposed of in 1990 by the Court by giving certain directions to improve the quality of life of around 2941 children employed in the firework factories, while it had also noted that it is a hazardous industry giving rise to accidents including fatal cases. It had also constituted a committee to oversee the directions given by the court.
  • The Court subsequently took suo-motu cognisance by itself in the present matter when news of an unfortunate accident in one of the factories in Sivakasi was published.
  • The Court was informed by the state government that the deceased was a 39-year-old person. 
  • The Court directed the state government regarding the payment of compensation and it constituted an advocates’ commission to visit the area and prepare a comprehensive report. The commission submitted the report in November 1991.

Judgement

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the instant case observed that the issue of child labour has to be dealt with in a broad manner as a national problem but not as limited only to any particular region such as Sivakasi. The Court observed that poverty is one of the basic causes of child labour.

The Court first noted the Constitutional provisions that may be relevant to the issue of child labour or may be considered as a part of the solution to the issue. The Court noted Articles 24, 39(e) and (f), 41, 45 and 47 of the Constitution. It observed that Article 24 is the fundamental right and even Article 45 has been given great significance by the court by ruling it as a fundamental right in the Unnikrishnan, J.P. v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1993) judgement. The Court further noted Article 37 to observe that even though the other provisions are part of directive principles of state policy, they are fundamental in the governance of the country and are obligatory on the organs of the state. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also observed the international commitment made by India by ratifying the International Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Court noted that India has committed to progressively implement Article 32 of the Convention. The Court also noted the various statutory provisions that have been enacted to prohibit the employment of children in different occupations.

The Court ruled that every employer must be asked to pay a compensation of Rs. 20,000 for every child employed in contravention of the provisions of the Child and Adolescent (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986. The Court held that the inspectors appointed under that Act should ensure that the compensation is paid by the employer to a fund known as the Child Labour Rehabilitation-cum-Welfare Fund. The Court observed that all the Constitutional Provisions must be implemented by the appropriate government as defined under Section 2(f) of the aforementioned Act.

Labourers Working on Salal Hydro-Electric Project v. State of Jammu and Kashmir, 1983

Although the instant case was mainly about the exploitation of workers employed for the construction of the Hydroelectric project near Salal in Jammu and Kashmir, the case also ruled about the issue of child labour as a few minors were found employed on the project site. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in this case reaffirmed the ruling of the Apex Court in People’s Union for Democratic Rights and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors (Asiad Workers’ Case).

Brief facts

An Article published in the Indian Express Newspaper on August 26th 1982 reported that a large number of migrant workers from Orissa who were employed for the construction of the Salal Hydroelectric project undertaken by the Central government were denied various benefits available to workers under labour laws and were exploited.

The People’s Union for Democratic Rights addressed a letter to the Hon’ble Supreme Court with a copy of the news article and prayed before the court to treat the letter as a writ petition. 

It was accepted by the court and was treated as a writ petition. The Court ordered the Labour Commission of Jammu and Kashmir to visit the construction site and to prepare and submit a report.

The Jammu and Kashmir Labour Commission submitted its final report in October 1982. The report revealed there were a few instances of violation of labour laws, especially the Minimum Wages Act, of 1973 and the Contract Labour Act. The report further revealed that some kids were present at the construction site.

The presence of children was explained by stating that the kids were present there to accompany their family members on their own and insist on getting employed.

Judgement

The Hon’ble Supreme Court on the issue of Child Labour reaffirmed the observations made in the Asiad Workers’ Case that construction is a hazardous occupation and therefore no children below 14 years of age can be employed for construction work. The Court noted that child labour is a complicated issue which purely exists on economic grounds. It observed that the employment of children either by parents or by the kids themselves was mainly due to financial constraints and for livelihood. It highlighted that it is due to such socio-economic conditions that it is difficult to solve the issue of child labour and it is the same reason that Article 24 extends to the employment of children in mines, factories and other hazardous employment. The Court noted that the issue will continue to exist as long as there exists poverty. It further noted that though it is hard to get rid of child labour completely, attempts should be made to reduce it if not eradicate it. The Court observed that the reduction of child labour is necessary to ensure that a child gets an education which is essential for the socio-economic development of the nation. 

The Court noted that the issue of child labour cannot be solved merely by legislative process. It observed that construction work is certainly a hazardous occupation and hence employment of children must be prohibited at construction sites according to Article 24 of the Constitution. The Court further ruled that the enforcement of Article 24 has to be done by the Central government and should provide various facilities to the children of the workers such as free books, transportation and arrange for payment of school fees which would help convince the workers to send their children to school. The Court suggested if any construction work undertaken by the Central government is likely to last for a long time, then the government must ensure schooling facilities for the workers living near or at the construction site.

In addition to the above-mentioned judgements, various other judgements highlight the importance of educating children and the provision of other facilities that have been mentioned under various Articles in Part IV of the Constitution. One such significant observation was made in the judgements of Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka (1992) and Unnikrishnan, J.P. v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1993) where the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that the Right to education is a fundamental part of the Right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. Additionally, apart from the rulings of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, various High Courts have made several observations and given directions for the rehabilitation of children. 

National Child Labour Project Scheme

National Child Labour Project (NCLP) Scheme was started in 1988 by the Central government in pursuance of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 and as a part of an action plan that was discussed in National Child Labour Policy, 1987. The NCLP Scheme was started for the rehabilitation of children rescued from various hazardous occupations. This scheme focuses on the educational rehabilitation of rescued children. It was initiated to rehabilitate children from 12 child labour-endemic districts across the country.

Objectives

The NCLP Scheme is mainly concerned with the educational rehabilitation of the exploited children which is the primary goal of the scheme. The following are the objectives of the NCLP Scheme.

  • To adopt a sequential approach for rehabilitation of children engaged in child labour in different hazardous occupations.
  • To conduct surveys of child labour gathering information regarding the extent of child labour and the hazardous processes engaging child labour.
  • To withdraw children from hazardous processes and occupations and to rehabilitate them to schools for formal education. 
  • To provide various facilities to the children through special schools and rehabilitation centres.

The facilities provided by these centres include vocational training, bridge courses, mid-day meals, a monthly stipend of Rs. 150 per child, and health care facilities. Healthcare facilities are provided by appointing a doctor for a group of 20 schools.

Implementation of the Scheme

This project is implemented at the district level by a registered society under the chairmanship of the district administrative head. The society consists of other members from NGOs, concerned government departments, local institutions etc. These project societies are funded by the Ministry of Labour and Employment (Central government). 

A survey is conducted under this scheme to gather information about child labour engaged in various occupations which is followed by the withdrawal of those children from such occupations and then by their educational rehabilitation. The children belonging to the age group of 5 to 8 years are directly merged to formal schooling under Sarva Shikshana Abhiyan while the children belonging to the age group of 9 to 14 years are rehabilitated through the special schools established under this scheme. 

Current status of the Scheme.

The NCLP scheme which was initiated with merely 12 districts was later on expanded to 271 districts. The NCLP was sanctioned to 324 districts as of March 2021 and it has been merged with the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) Scheme of the Ministry of Education since then. Currently, around 3.2 lakh children are enrolled in 7311 schools and around 8.5 lakh children have already been rehabilitated to the formal education system since the initiation of the scheme. 

INDUS Project

The INDUS (Child Labour) Project is a joint project between India and the U.S. for the elimination of child labour. This project is jointly funded by the Ministry of Labour of India and the Department of Labour of the United States.

The Project was implemented in 21 districts across five states, namely, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Delhi and was completed in March 2009. The Project turned out to be exceptionally successful as it facilitated the withdrawal of around 1 lakh children which was 20,000 more than the target set during its inception. 

The major objectives and outcomes were similar to the NCLP project, it was treated as a part of the NCLP project. The project mainly aimed at conducting a detailed survey of various occupations engaging child labourers which was followed by the withdrawal of children and subsequently their educational rehabilitation.

Conclusion

It is an undisputed fact that child labour is India’s one of the biggest concern, but at the same the efforts made and the steps taken by the government cannot be undermined. Although child labour exists across the nation to a large extent, it has been significantly reduced over the past two decades due to the potential measures and schemes implemented by various states and the reduction is evident through the census data. The growing awareness among the people is also one of the reasons for the reduction in child labour. 

It is vital to understand that the complete eradication of child labour is not an easy task as poverty in India is still a concerning matter. As pointed out by the Apex Court in different judgements poverty is one of the biggest reasons for child labour. Therefore, efforts must be made to reduce the poverty rate which in turn will reduce child labour. The NCLP Scheme of the Central government is an exceptional measure which has been proven successful in rehabilitating several children across the country and enrolling them in a formal educational system. It is extremely necessary to implement more such measures which focus on tackling child labour as well as enabling children to secure a better future. 

As highlighted by the Apex Court in the Salal Hydroelectric project case, the issue of child labour cannot be merely solved by legislative process. In addition to the legislative process and policy making, steps must be taken to ensure proper implementation and enforcement of schemes and policies which are necessary to eradicate poverty and child labour. Ultimately, the value of a policy depends upon its execution because a good policy which is not rightly implemented cannot serve its purpose. Therefore, effective enforcement of policies and schemes must be ensured. The state must fulfil the obligations which are laid down as directive principles by effectively implementing them.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Which is the primary legislation on the issue of Child Labour?

The Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 is the primary legislation that deals with the issue of child labour.

Is Child Labour completely prohibited in India?

The employment of children below 14 years of age is completely prohibited but employment of children belonging to the age group of 14 to 18 years is allowed subject to certain restrictions.

References

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here