http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 1 of 7

PETITIONER:

MUKESH ADVANI

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

DATE OF JUDGMENT02/05/1985

BENCH:

DESAI, D.A.

BENCH:

DESAI, D.A.

VARADARAJAN, A. (J)

CITATION:

1985 AIR 1363 1985 SCR Supl. (1) 126

1985 SCC (3) 162 1985 SCALE (1)981

ACT:

Social Action Litigation-Exploitation of the workmen

from Tamil Nadu by the Mines contractors deprecated-Need for

the State protection of the poor and needy laborers who are

unable to negotiate on terms of equality, retierated-

Constitution of India, 1950. Articles 38, 41, 42, 43, Bonded

Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1974-Minimum Wages Act, 1948,

Payment of Bonus Act, 1965.

HEADNOTE:

Pursuant to an investigative report in the "Indian

Express" dated September 14, 1982, one of the advocates

practising in the Supreme Court addressed a letter to one of

the Judges of the Supreme Court depicting the horrid plight

of bonded labour from Tamil Nadu working in the stone

quarries at Raisen in Madhya Pradesh. It was alleged: (a)

Everyone recruited were paid a reimbursible advance of Rs.

1,000/- but the method of accounting is so manipulated that

the debt instead of getting wiped out, increased in

geometrical proportion and no workmen can have the

employment until the entire debt repaid which is beyond the

reach of the workmen; (b) The working conditions were bad.

There was no weekly holiday. Sanitary conditions were in

deplorable state. The workmen were not paid any wages during

rainy seasons, since the mines were shut off; (c) Not a

single legislation enacted for the welfare of labour is

implemented or respected and (d) Due to the inaction of the

Labour Department of the Centre and the State like absence

of a notification specifying minimum wages for the labour

force employed in the mines, resulting in poultry and meagre

payment there is naked and unabashed exploitation of

workmen. The report called for by the Supreme Court from the

District Judge Bhopal confirmed the said allegations and

further revealed that (a) on a complaint preferred 48

labourers were released by the Labour Department of Madhya

Pradesh; (b) a complaint has been lodged with the police

under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976; (c)

two or three cases against the Contractors were instituted

in fact and the said cases were pending; (d) the piece-rate

method of paying wages for digging a standard ’Khanti’ has

resulted sometime to no payment at all for both the male and

female labour employed; (e) a team of police force arrived

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 2 of 7

from Tamil Nadu and liberated the workmen and repatriated

them to Tamil Nadu and (f) the newspaper publicity had a

very salutary and desired effect in as much as various

contractors have given up efforts to recover the advances

which was a good achievement.

The State of Madhya Pradesh admitted the findings of

the District Judge, Bhopal and pointed out that in respect

of flagstone mines, the appropriate Government is the

Central Government under the payment of

127

Bonus Act, 1965 and the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The Tamil

Nadu Government have clarified as to how the labourers were

duped and taken to Madhya Pradesh and confirmed the release

of the labourers by their State Police.

The Court in the circumstances directed the Union of

India as appropriate Government to issue a preliminary

notification under section 5 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948

setting out its proposal for information of persons likely

to be affected thereby and specifying a date not less than

two months from the date of the Notification on which

proposals will be taken into consideration. The Union of

India accordingly issued necessary notification dated March

24,1982 and October 31, 1983 setting out the