LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

BANDHUA MUKTI MORCHA versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [1991] 3 S.C.R. 524 · Decided: 13-08-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RANGANATH MISRA, M.M. PUNCHHI, S.C. AGRAWAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
BANDHUA MUKTI MORCHA 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
AUGUST 13, 1991 
B 
[RANGANATH MISRA, CJ, M.M. PUNCHHI AND 
S.C. AGRAWAL, JJ.] 
Bonded Labour system-Creation, operation and effect of. 
Constitution of India, 1950-#<rticles 23( 1), 39(c}, 41, 42-
C 
Bonded labour in quarries of Haryana-Governmen(s failure to imple· 
ment the judgment in ( 1984) 3 SCC 161-Measures to take indicated. 
Constitution of India, 1950-Article 32-Letter addressed to 
.5upreme Court complaining bonded labour-Treated writ petition. 
D 
A letter l!cldressed to tb,is Court CQmplaining about prevalence of 
bonded labolll" system in the quarries of Faridabad District in Haryana 
State was trqled as a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution. 
Two Advocates were appointed as Commissioners to inquire into 
the working COllditions of the stone quarry workers. Later, this Court, 
E 
finding the 1,1eeessity of an In-depth investigation into social and legal 
aspects of the problem, also appointed two Commissioners-Dr. S.B. 
Patvardhan and Mr, Krbhan M1thaj11n 111 study the working conditions 
prevaJJlng In tb.e various qll!ll'ries witbi1,1 the Faridabad district with 
particular reference to vlo4ttlo1,1 of provisions of the Bonded Labour 
System (Abol,itlon) Act 11f l'l'71i and Inter-State Migrant Workmen 
F 
(Regulation or El)lployment 4 Conditions of Service) Act. 
The Co!DmlssJoner furlljshed their report on 28th of June, 1982. 
The 3·Judge Bench 
la~IU'd the matter and in its judgment 
(reported in (1984) 3 sec uti); dealt with various aspects of the pro-
G 
blem and takjpg into a<:couut ~ 
information collected by Advocate· 
Commissioners and the rqJOft made by Dr. Patvardhan. 
The C11urt 41d ,not trqt the writ petition as disposed of by its 
judgment and the appll~.$W'Vived for further monitoring. 
H 
This Court also appoinlejl Shri ILaxmi Dhar Misra, Joint Secretary 
524 
j 
BANDHUA MUKTI MORCHA v. U.0.l. 
525 
in the Ministry of Labour, Government of India as a Commissioner tci 
carry out the assignments stated in the judgment. 
Mr. Laxmidhar Misra, in due course, submitted his report in two 
parts-one dealing with the identification oNhe bonded labour and the 
second covering the inquiry into the implementation of the 21 
directives. 
The petitioner-Morcha, filed a petition for contempt alleging that 
the directions were not being implemented. 
Mr. Mahabir Jain of the Faculty of National Labour Institute was 
appointed to inquire into the measures and report on the degrees to 
which the 21 directives issued by the Court had been implemented and 
to present to the Court a clear picture of the issues involved for enabling 
it to make its own assessment and come to a conclusion as to whether the 
directions had been or were being implemented and also as to whether 
action for contempt was appropriate or in the matter of monitoring the 
social problem, some other course was necessary to be adopted, and in 
February, 1989, the report was submitted to the Court. 
As the 3-Judge Bench had gone into the philosophy involved in the 
matter in the judgment, what remains for consideration at this stage 
was more or less a clear review of the enforcement of the directives and 
assessment of the outcome for achieving the statutory purpose and the 
constitutional goal and for the fulfilment of the hopes and expectations 
of this Court in that regard. 
.. 
The matter was heard for some time on the basis of these reports 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
of Mr. Jain and this Court reserved judgment on 10th of July, 1990. 
When the matter was about to be disposed a communication was 
F 
received by the Court dated 24.1.1991 from the Director General of 
Labour Welfare in the Ministry of Labour that the total number of 
unrehabilitated bonded labourers was 523 nPto 30.U.1990, whereas the 
number to be 3993 according to the petitioner and on 21st February, 
1991, this court directed a Committee to check up the particulars and to 
furnish a report, which was furnished on July 1, 1991, from which it G 
.,. 
was understood that the total number of identified bonded labour is. 
around 2000 and not 3993. 
The report indicated that the wages, the facility of schooling and 
medical treatment, availability of water, provisions and scope for recre-
ation are aspects which still require attention. No attention has been H 
526 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1991) 3 S.C.R. 
A 
bestowed by the inspecting authority of the labour law enforcers to 
secure improved conditions of working. 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.