Skip to main content

Followers

2. People's Union For Democratic Rights vs. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 1480

 Ref: AIR 1982 SC 1480

Sub:- This case is based on a Public Interest Litigation on a subject related to the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976.


Facts of the case :-

1. In the instant case, People's Union For Democratic Rights is an institution which has, through a letter, informed the Supreme Court that fundamental right and legal right of the workers engaged in the scheme of the Asiad Games are being infringed upon.


2. The contractor is giving wages to the workers by deduct- ing Rs. 1 as a commission at the time of payment of Rs. 7 to women and Rs. 8 to the men workers.


3. The institution stated that in this scheme, the workers are being made to work as bonded labour and they are not being paid even a minimum wages.


4. Supreme Court allowed this letter treating it as a writ under Article 32.


Supreme Court :-

At the time of hearing, the court held that the labour class of this country, what so ever sector they belong, they can directly or through a organisation, give an application, they need not to follow procedural rules of the Court and this is the utmost duty of the Court to issue directions to the Authorities concerned to check the inhuman treat- ment being meted out to the workers, so that different labour laws are fully well applied and their exploitation be ended.


In order to decide this matter the Court confirmed the principle of 'Equal pay for Equal work' and also issued directions for payment of equal wages to male and female workers.


The Court held that non-payment of minimum wages to the workers engaged in different schemes is violation of the right to livelihood with human dignity.


According to Justice Shri Bhagwati, the workers are provided rights and benefits under several labour laws so that the human dig- nity is maintained and if they are denied this right, it will be violation of Article 21.


Judgment:- Petition allowed

Law points :-

1. Article 21 provides right to livelihood with human dig- nity.


2. Equal payment for equal work is a fundamental right of every worker.


3. The purpose of Public Interest Litigation is to protect pub- lic interest and to safeguard the fundamental rights of any class of people.


4. The labour class of this country, what so ever sector they belong, they can directly or through an organisation, give an application.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Important Topics for Semester Exam in Environmental Law useful for LL.B Students.

  1.           State facts and the principles of law laid down in the case of Monera Mandal Sahkari Shakkar Karkhana Society vs M.P. Board of Prevention of Water Pollution, 1993 M.P.L.J.270.   2.            Power to take samples of effluents and procedure to be followed in connection therewith under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 3.            Discuss the various provisions Indian Constitution concerning Environmental Protection. What are the main features of the Environment (Protection) Act 1986 and the provisions of penalties and procedure for violation of provisions, rules, orders and instructions. 4.            Describe the special provisions in the case of supersession of the Central Board or the State Board constituted under the Water (prevention and control of pollution) Act, 1974. Explain in brief about the provisions regarding appeal and revision under this Act. 5.            Explain the objects and main provisions of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollut
Post a Comment
Read more

1. A. Mackenzie vs. J S Izzak, AIR 1970 SC 1906

Ref : AIR 1970 SC 1906 Sub :- This case is based on Section 2 of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923. Facts of the case :- 1. S.S. Dwarka is a ship whose owner is The British India Stream Navigation Limited and Mackenzie was its agent. 2. Shaikh Ibrahim Hasan was a class II seaman on this ship and who was missing from the ship. 3. It was clear from the medical log book that he had a chest pain on 13 December 1961 and he was suffering from it. 4. It was known from the medical checkup that nothing was unusual and medical officer gave him medicines and con- firmed his recovery and joining back on his duty next day. 5. It was known from the log book of the office on 16 Decem- ber 1961 that he was on the ship that day and he was seen on the bridge at 2:50 in the morning. 6. He was found missing at 6:15 in the morning. The master of the ship informed on the radio message at 7:30 in the morning that a seaman is missing between Khoramsar and Asahar and he is likely to be missing in the river.
Post a Comment
Read more