Case Brief: Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India and Ors. | Important Acts and Laws for Judiciary Exams PDF Download

Facts of Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India and Ors.

• Background of the petitioner, Bandhua Mukti Morcha
• Discovery of poor working conditions in Faridabad stone quarries
• Initiation of a writ petition under Article 32 of the constitution
• Formation of a commission to investigate the allegations
• Verification of the allegations by the commission
• Evidence of rights violation of the laborers

Issues in Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India and Ors.

• Validity of the writ petition filed under Article 32 of the constitution: The primary concern is whether the legal document submitted under Article 32 is legitimate and acceptable within the constitutional framework.
• Violation of fundamental rights of the workers: This point questions whether the rights fundamental to the workers were indeed breached or not, emphasizing the importance of protecting their basic entitlements.
• Power of the Supreme Court to appoint commissions or investigating bodies under Article 32: This issue delves into the authority of the Supreme Court to designate investigative bodies or commissions within the scope of Article 32, contemplating the extent of its jurisdiction in such matters.
• Determination of whether the workers are bonded laborers: This aspect focuses on establishing whether the individuals referred to as "workmen" in the case are indeed subjected to bonded labor, highlighting the significance of this distinction.
• Entitlement of workmen in the case to relief under various social labor legislations: This point explores whether the workmen involved in the case are eligible to receive relief under different social labor laws, underscoring the importance of providing necessary support and protections.

Judgement: Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India and Ors.

• The Supreme Court validated the petition and issued directives to the Haryana government, the Central Government, and other administrative bodies, which include:
• The government of Haryana is mandated to establish a vigilance committee in each division of the district within six weeks of the judgment to ensure compliance with Section 13 of the Bonded Labour Act, 1976.
• A district magistrate must be appointed by the government of Haryana to identify bonded laborers in accordance with the law.
• The state government must collaborate with NGOs and voluntary agencies to guarantee the enforcement of the Bonded Labour Act, 1976.
• Within three months of the judgment, the government of Haryana needs to rehabilitate the bonded laborers.
• Both the Central and State Governments are responsible for enforcing the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.
• Central government offices are required to conduct surprise visits at least once a week.
• The Central Board of Workers Education will regularly conduct camps to educate workers about their rights and benefits under the law.

Legal Principles Involved

• Bonded Labour System Act, 1976
• Mines Rules, 1955
• Mines Vocational Training Rules, 1966
• Maternity Benefit Act, 1961
• Article 32 of the Indian Constitution

Conclusion

A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court delivered the judgment, significantly improving the working conditions of bonded laborers. The ruling aimed to safeguard even the most basic rights of laborers from violations. In essence, the verdict was deemed appropriate and aligned with the demands of justice.