Author: MANISH S K, a law student of PATEL LAW COLLEGE (Bangalore)
Case: PEOPLE’S UNION FOR DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS (PUDR)
Vs
UNION OF. INDIA
Citation: 1982 AIR 1473.
Court: Supreme Court of India.
Bench: P.N. Bhagwati, Baharul Islam.
SUBJECT: Public Interest Litigation.
Petitioner: PEOPLE’S UNION FOR DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS (PUDR)
Respondent: UNION OF INDIA & Ors
INTRODUCTION
This case popularly known as Asiad workers case is a landmark case in the labour law history and was filed as a Public Interest Litigation to the supreme court of India using Article 32 for protection of public’s interest by People’s union for democratic rights because of the exploitation being on the construction workers employed for the 1982 Asian Games in New Delhi.
PUDR, which is an organization who stand by the people for their welfare in providing legal defense, who are a group of independent entity and are not affiliated with any of the political parties run in the state.
As per Article 300 of the constitution, the government of India cannot be used to represent it in any legal matters so it created an alternate called “Union of India” which is deemed “To sue and be sued”.
FACTS OF THE CASE
At the start of the 80’s the whole country was focused for the preparation of Asian games which was to take place in Delhi, India of 1982, but in the August of 1981 eyes of the people’s union for democratic rights was attracted to the workers working for the ASIAD-82.
Finding things to be fishy the PUDR in the August of 1981 visited several construction sites and found that there were a lot of children who were put to labour which was violative of Article 24 which completed prohibited the employment of children in factory
In the course of their investigation also found that the workers were put to hard labour and they were forced to work without any fixed hours of work or payment of minimum daily wage fixed by the law.
This in term was termed as begar aor slave labour which was violative of Article 23 that prohibits the traffic of human being and forced labour. The workers taken to work were basically migrants and contract labourers, in which the jamadars charged Re.1 as commission from Rs. 9.25 each day and gave them Rs.8.25 violating the Minimum wages Act, 1948 and paid even less Rs.7 for women works which was violative of Equal Remuneration Act, 1976.
Also, the children were put to hard labour and were becoming prey to undernutrition and also faced risks of accident in working places because of lack of safety measures.
ARGUMENTS
- PETITIONOR
Mainly concerned to the ill treatment of workers PUDR arguments were cast on violation of Fundamental Rights of Article 14 (Right to Equality), Article 19 (Right to Freedom), and Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) from the Indian Constitution. They also put their allegations as the labourers were not compiled by labor laws, working with inadequate working hours, non-payment of wages and were treated as begar, the workers being illiterate about the legal awareness and that the state was to be held liable as they were employed directly by the government.
- RESPONDENT
The Respondents (Contractors and state representatives) put forth their arguments that they were in compliance with the existing laws and regulations. The Financial constraints had effect on project’s scale made it difficult to meet all the required regulations completely and claimed that they had been making efforts to improve the conditions of the working environment gradually, providing basic amenities like housing, healthcare, sanitation and much more. For the payment of wages, the contractors claimed that they fell to financial shortages.
The respondents also raised that some aspects claimed by the petitioners could also be made in labor tribunals which had jurisdiction to which they could have taken effect and handled it.
ISSUES
- Whether the writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Indian constitution maintainable against union of India, Delhi Administration and Delhi development Authority?
- Can this petition be passed on to private contractors as they were the offending parties?
- The petition files as violation of Fundamental Rights be maintained as the was breach of labor laws?
JUDGEMENT
The court held that the negligence leading to poor working conditions which also lacked safety measured and non-payment of minimum wages were violative of the fundamental rights under Article 21(Right to life and personal liberty), Article 23(Prohibition of trafficking in human beings and forced labour) of the Indian Constitution, and said that the state (being a primary employer) had responsibilities to safeguard labour laws and to protect the rights of the workers.
Faced with Discriminated payment of wages the court ordered the regulatory bodies to strictly monitor and enforce the laws such as The Minimum Wages Act,1948, The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act,1970, and also included Active consideration of The Inter-state Migrant workmen (Regulation of Employment and conditions of Service) Act,1979.
Directing to strictly obey the law of Payment of Minimum wages to the employees and to ensure payment to be made regularly and made on time, also instructed to improve the working conditions and to grant them Basic livable facilities until the completion of the project.
Due to lack of knowledge the workers were not exposed to legal aid the court stressed that the legal aid was important and to be made accessible by them to make workers be aware of their rights and could seek redressal for their grievances.
This judgement by the court had a broad impact that the economic development projects must respect the workers’ rights and preceded for the future cases that involved labour laws.
REASON FOR THE JUDGEMENT
The Judgement by The Supreme court of India on the Asiad Workers case was based on several considerations and many factors as follows,
- The court considered the working and living conditions of the Asiad workers where violative of Fundamental Rights of Article 21 and Article 23 guaranteed under the Indian constitution.
- The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filled by the Activists and Labour Rights Organization to the Honorable Supreme Court of India helps the courts to address the issues that effects the public at large and helps guide the marginalized Communities.
- There was clear evidence that the contractors involved in the Asian Games were not complying with the existing labour laws with payment of wages to its employees.
- The court took in the need for such Activists to hold their stance in Humanitarian concerns and intervene in such cases to protect the rights of the workers.
- To place its judgement the Honorable Supreme Court of India also referred the Directive Principles of the State policy to guide the state in formatting policies aimed to protect and ensure Social and Economic Justice.
CASE LAWS
- Kishan Lal & Sons vs Government Of Nct. Of Delhi & Ors, On 28 April, 2010: The case was cited by which stated on the strength of the proceedings it has to be clear that the respondents were liable to non-payment of wages and to be held liable.
- Ircon International Ltd. Vs Union Of India (UOI) And Ors, On 26 April, 2006: The case was cited by as the agricultural labourers were not paid minimum wage where it was not a gainful employment.
- Maneka Gandhi vs Union Of India, on 25 January, 1978: This case was cited as the Fundamental Rights are basic rights for the citizens of India which has to safeguard by the state.
- S. Vasudevan & Ors. Vs S.D. Mital And Ors, On 18 January, 1961: This case was cited which stated that meaning for the work “begar”, as forced labour which without payment of even minimum wage should be prohibited .
CONCLUSION
The concept to take the poor workers to work was a very facilitated idea but the injustice is not acceptable the Activists took a very convincing step to verify the workers situation and worked with complete dedication in bailing justice to the labourers. The Supreme court of India gave a clear judgement that upheld the Fundamental Rights, safeguarding the rights and dignity in providing right to life to the people facing poverty.
Even with the existence to such laws there is a lot of negligence towards the law and if not for the people union for democratic rights this factor could not have come to light and we the citizens of India must work in providing such Humanitarian activities to help the upliftment of our own people so that there are justice and people would fear to do such ill actions and obey the law by all means.
The Public Interest Litigation in this case showed the power of the legal mechanism in bringing about social change and justice, which led to strict enforcement of labour laws and stated that the judiciary can intervene when these laws are violated.
FAQ’s
- What is the Asiad Workers case?
The Asiad Workers case refers to the legal and social issues surrounding the exploitation and poor working conditions of labourers who were involved in the construction of facilities for the Asian Games in New Delhi, India of 1982. This case became significant due to the several mistreatments to the workers and that there was strict legal action taken to address these issues.
- What were the main issues faced by the Asiad workers?
The Asiad workers faced several issues such as: Extremely long working hours without proper breaks. Lack of proper safety measures and equipment. Improper wages and delayed payments. Poor and unhygienic living conditions. No access to medical facilities and social security.
- Who filed the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Asiad Workers case?
The PIL was filed by labor rights activists and other organizations, which was primarily led by activists like P.N. Bhagwati and the People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR).
- What was the outcome of the Supreme Court judgment in the Asiad Workers case?
The Supreme Court of India delivered a landmark judgment that ensures the protection of the fundamental rights of workers. The court directed the government to ensure compliance with existing labor laws, including proper payment of wages, regulation of working hours, and improvement of living conditions for the workers.
- What impact did the Asiad Workers case have on labor laws in India?
The Asiad Workers case had a significant impact on labor laws and labor rights in India. It highlighted the need for stricter enforcement of labor laws and set a precedent for future labor-related legal cases. The case also increased public awareness about the ill effects on the marginalized and exploitation on workers.
- How did the government respond to the Supreme Court’s directives?
Following the Supreme Court’s directives, the government had to take steps to improve the working and living conditions of the Asiad workers. This included ensuring timely payment of wages, implementing safety measures, and providing better housing facilities. However, the effectiveness of these measures varied and continued to be monitored by labor rights organizations.
- Why is the Asiad Workers case considered a landmark case?
The Asiad Workers case is considered a landmark case because it brought to light the severe exploitation of construction workers and resulted in a significant judicial intervention that aimed to protect and enforce the rights of these workers. It set important legal precedents for labor rights and public interest litigation in India.
