Ex-post-facto law
Image source: https://bit.ly/3iYJD6A

This article is written by Rishabh Shukla, pursuing B.A.LL.B (Hons) from the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Faculty of Law. This article is a detailed analysis of the Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Bill, 2020.

Introduction

The Haryana Government passed the ‘Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Bill, 2020’, (the Bill) on November 5, 2020. The assent of the Governor of Haryana for the same was received on February 26, 2021. The aim of the bill is to increase employment opportunities for the locals in the private sector. Similar to the Bill introduced by Andhra Pradesh Government, Haryana Government has also announced that 75 percent of private-sector jobs in the state, till a certain salary slab, shall be reserved for local candidates.

The Bill shall come into force on such date, as the Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify. The implemented Bill would reserve 75% of the jobs in specified private sector posts for specific local candidates.

The flood of countless migrants seeking low-paid positions puts a critical effect on local framework and lodging and prompts the expansion of slums. This has prompted natural and medical problems which have been intensely felt in the metropolitan spaces of Haryana influencing the nature of living and work. Accordingly, offering inclination to local candidates in low-paid jobs is socially, financially and ecologically attractive and any such inclination would be in light of a legitimate concern for the overall population.

With the authorization of the present Bill, in light of a legitimate concern for the public, the State is likewise going to support every one of the private employers in Haryana to help and expand local employment. The Bill will give enormous advantages to the private employers straightforwardly or in a roundabout way through the certified and trained neighbourhood local workforce. Accessibility of a reasonable labour force locally would improve the effectiveness of the industry as the labour force is one of the significant parts for the advancement of any mechanical association/industrial facility.

Key features of the Bill

  1. To give essentially 75% of employment to the local candidates in different companies, societies, trusts, limited liability partnerships firms, partnership firms and so forth arranged in the State of Haryana.
  2. To give training to capable local candidates were qualified or reasonable candidates are not available.

Application and duration of the Bill

  • Applicability – The Bill is applicable to all the companies, societies, trusts, limited liability partnership firms, partnership firms and an entity, employing 10 or more persons on salary, wages or other remuneration, as may be notified by the government on an updated basis. It shall not include the central or state legislative authority or any other institution owned by the Central or State Government.
  • Duration – As per the Bill, its provisions shall cease to have an effect on the expiry of 10 years from the date of its commencement (such date is supposed to be notified by the State Government).

Important provisions

Registration of employees

Employers in the applicable establishments are supposed to register employees who are having a monthly salary below Rs 50,000 on a designated portal, within 3 months of the Bill coming into effect. An employer is not supposed to employ any new person till the time such registration is complete.

Recruitment of local candidates

For posts where the gross monthly salaries or wages are within the wage limit, every employer is supposed to employ 75% of the local candidates. The term ‘local candidate’ refers to any candidate who has a domicile in the state of Haryana. An employer may, at his option, restrict the employment of local candidates from any district in Haryana, to 10% of the total number of local candidates. Further, these local candidates have an option to avail benefits that are mentioned under the Act, only when they have registered themselves on the designated portal.

Exemption from recruiting local candidates: If an adequate number of local candidates of the desired skill, qualification, or proficiency is not available, employers have the option to claim exemption from recruiting local candidates. In such a situation, the employer is supposed to apply, in the prescribed manner, to the designated officer as defined under the Act, (“Designated Officer”). The Designated Officer thereafter, after carrying out an inquiry as he deems fit, and after evaluating the attempt made by the employer to recruit local candidates of desired skill, qualifications, proficiency, has the option to either accept or reject the claim of the employer for an exemption or to instruct such employer to train the local candidates to achieve the desired/required skill, qualification or proficiency.

Offences and penalties

Liability in case of offences: In an event of the commission of an offence by a company, unless they are able to prove that such offence was committed without their knowledge or due consent, every director, manager, secretary or person concerned with the management of the company is deemed guilty of such offence.

Will the employer be penalised for not following provisions of this Act

Yes, once it is established that an employer has committed any violation with respect to the provisions of the Act, the employer can be penalised with a minimum fine of Rs. 10,000 to a maximum fine of Rs. 2 lakhs. Nonetheless, if the employer still chooses to continue committing such violation, even after conviction, then in that case, a penalty of Rs. 1,000 per day shall be imposed on him till the day such violation continues. A penalty of Rs. 50,000 shall be levied on the employer who knowingly produces counterfeits or false records or false statements. On a subsequent offence, the penalty shall not be less than Rs. 2 lakhs, and it may extend up to Rs. 5 lakhs.

Constitutional issues related to the Bill

Certain fundamental rights have been guaranteed to all citizens by the virtue of the Constitution of India. These rights include the right to equality before the law (Article 14-18), the right to freedom to reside in any part of the country, and the right to practice any occupation or business. They prohibit every sort of discrimination on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. However, through the process of reservation in the education and employment sector, the state may provide for the upliftment of certain sections of society. These reservations are based on domicile or backwardness.

For instance, the Constitution, under Article 16(3) grants the Parliament powers to make employment-related laws for an office that works under the State, providing requirements such as residence within that state. Under Article 15(4), the State has the power to make provisions for the upliftment of socially and educationally backward classes of citizens.  Further, under Article 16(4), the State has the power to make provisions for reservation of posts or appointments in favour of citizens who fall under the category of backward classes and who are not adequately represented in the services of the State.

The Bill makes it mandatory for all the Haryana based private establishments to provide 75% of their new jobs to local candidates. This gives rise to 3 potential issues. 

  • Firstly, reservation in private institutions may result in violating their right to carry on occupation or business. 
  • Secondly, a state law that is providing for domicile-based reservation may not be termed constitutional. 
  • Lastly, 75% reservation in employment may result in violating the guidelines that were laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in the past. These issues will be examined in detail below.

Reservation in private institutions may violate Article 19(1)(g)

The Bill makes it mandatory for all Haryana based companies, societies, trusts, partnership firms, or any person to employ 10 or more persons in order to provide 75% of new job opportunities to local candidates. Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution states that every citizen has a fundamental right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business. Mandating private institutions to employ a certain set of candidates may result in encroachment upon such institutions’ fundamental right to carry on their occupation.  

In the year 2002, the Honourable Supreme Court of India held that the private educational institutions that are unaided are entitled to have full autonomy in their management and administration. Further, in the year 2005, the Court ruled that State is not entitled to insist on unaided private educational institutions, to implement reservation on the basis of any other criterion except for merit. It was held that the State cannot force private educational institutions to provide for reservations, merely because the resources of the State for providing professional education are limited. In doing so, the Court further observed that the right to establish and administer an educational institution will also be counted as an occupation under Article 19(1)(g).

Subsequently, in the year 2005, the 93rd Constitutional Amendment Act was passed, which allowed the State to make provisions in the matters related to admission in private educational institutions, for the upliftment of socially and educationally backward classes of citizens. However, it is pertinent to note that the amendment does not provide the State with the power to make such provisions for employment in private sectors. Therefore, the provision for reservation mentioned in the Bill may result in a violation of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. 

State law providing for reservation solely on the basis of domicile may not be constitutional

The Bill commands foundations to give reservation in work to local candidates. Local candidates are people who have a residence in the territory of Haryana. In 1957, the Public Employment (Requirement as to Residence) Act, 1957 was passed to nullify all existing laws endorsing any necessity of residence inside a state for public employment. Further, Article 16(2) of the Constitution explicitly disallows any segregation dependent on the place of birth or residence in the issue of public employment. However, a few states in the past have taken measures to accommodate reservations dependent on domicile. In these cases, the Supreme Court has held that reservation in employment based wholly on domicile is violative of Article 14 (balance under the steady gaze of law) and Article 16(2) of the Constitution. The Court held that domicile in itself doesn’t give any substantial or sensible order for giving reservation.

For instance, in 2002, the Supreme Court announced the appointment of government teachers in Rajasthan where the state offered inclination to candidates having a place with a specific district, as illegal. It held that geological order can be utilized for the categorisation of financial backwardness. Except as provided in Article 16(3) residence by itself in a state cannot be a ground for reservation. It is pertinent to note that the power to establish a law providing for residence as a ground for reservation (in public employment) is vested only with the Parliament under Article 16(3).  Essentially, in 1995, the Supreme Court struck down rules by the Andhra Pradesh government giving preference for competitors with Telugu medium in public services. It held that such an arrangement will remove the best applicants and would give unnecessary benefits to less praiseworthy candidates. 

Notwithstanding, as of late, some different states have additionally taken measures to accommodate reservations for local applicants in the private sector. In July 2019, the Andhra Pradesh government passed a law to accommodate 75% reservation to local people in industries or production lines. The following Act has been challenged in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. In May 2020, the High Court observed that the share for local people in private positions might be illegal, and sought a reply from the public authority. The case is now sub judice.

Conclusion

State governments have endeavoured shifted measures to lift up the local residents of their state and augmentation the work extent. In any case, preferring a specific part of the general public based on their domicile over different segments, in regions requiring capability and abilities is simply prone to hamper the nature of the business and market. The well-deserving candidate might be shunned from being employed at specific organizations and add to the economy of the country and raise the quality market just on the ground of not being a resident of a specific state. Further, the private areas may not see the value in such high mediation from the public authority wherein they won’t just think twice about the nature of candidates being employed yet additionally cause extra cost on training the employees for the necessary range of abilities. Private industries may rather search for a change in their office areas to an adjoining state in this manner prompting an enormous effect on the neighbourhood work of such a state as well as it will affect the real estate sector. State governments should engage their local population with abilities and capabilities rather than supporting reservations.

References


Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here