ART.

24
Introduction
A lot of us in recent times have been coming across the news about the exploitation of house help in
the country, especially the female and the young house help. Numerous children and young women
due to various obvious reasons, poverty being one among them, are usually forced to work at various
places such as factories and as maids in households. This employment or work often comes with a lot
of exploitation which goes unnoticed and unaddressed most of the time. Although there is a
fundamental right guaranteed against exploitation, lack of awareness along with lack of
implementation and resources is one of the major reasons why numerous individuals are exploited
for their labour and other purposes.

Fundamental Rights are an important facet of the Indian Constitution. They are also a part of the
basic structure of the Constitution as it has been held in Kesavananda Bharathi v. State of Kerala
(1973). Part III of the Constitution which consists of around 27 Articles guarantees six primary
Fundamental Rights under various heads. These rights include the Right to Equality (Article 14), the
Right to freedom (Article 19), the Right against exploitation (Articles 23 and 24), the Right to freedom
of Religion (Articles 25-28), Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29 and 30) and the Right to
Constitutional Remedies (Article 32). All of these rights are of great importance and hold significant
value in ensuring the protection of civil liberties.

The Right against exploitation is an important fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution
which not only ensures the protection of civil liberties but also protects from the exploitation of
individuals for various purposes such as trafficking, forced labour etc. The Right against exploitation
is discussed under Articles 23 and 24 of the Constitution. Article 23 prohibits the practices of human
trafficking and forced labour and Article 24 provides for the prohibition of child labour. This article
deals with child labour in India in light of Article 24 of the Constitution. The article delves into the
policies formulated in furtherance of the fundamental right guaranteed under the aforementioned
Article and various other steps that have been taken to eliminate child labour. The article also looks
into the various rulings of the High Courts and the Apex Court.

Child Labour in India

Child labour has been one of the most concerning social issues in India for a very long time but it has
now been reduced to a great extent due to the efforts and measures taken by the various organs of
the government. The figure of children engaged in child labour has been reduced to 43.5 lakh in the
2011 census from 1.2 crore in the 2001 census which is a remarkable achievement for the nation.
However, we still have a long way to go and become a country where we have zero tolerance for
child labour.

The first committee to address the issue of child labour was constituted in 1979 which was called the
Gurupadaswamy Committee. The committee examined the issue in detail and made various
recommendations accordingly. The committee highlighted poverty as one of the main reasons for the
rampant child labour across the country. As a result of recommendations made by this committee,
the first legislation on child labour, the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act was enacted in
1986. Since then numerous measures have been taken to tackle the issue which have been
significantly successful. The Supreme Court of India in M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu (1996)
noted the enormity of the issue of child labour in the country and observed that the issue had to be
dealt in broad manner as a national issue.

Meaning of exploitation
Exploitation means taking unjust or unfair advantage of resources or labour to a large extent. It can
be also termed as misuse.

Merriam-Webster defines exploitation as "an act or instance of exploiting" and 'exploiting" according
to the dictionary refers to "to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage". Therefore
summing up the definition, the term exploitation can be defined as the act or instance of making
unfair use for one's advantage.

Collins dictionary defines exploitation as "selfish utilisation".

The Cambridge Dictionary defines exploitation as "the act of using someone unfairly for your own
advantage".

The Oxford Learner's Dictionary defines exploitation as "a situation in which someone treats
someone else in an unfair way, especially in order to make money from their work".

Legal Definition
According to Explanation 1 of Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the term exploitation
includes "any act of physical exploitation or any form of sexual exploitation, slavery or practices
similar to slavery, servitude, or the forced removal of organs." Although the provision talks about
exploitation in the context of the trafficking of a person, the general meaning of exploitation under
Articles 23 and 24 is the same.

The legal framework in furtherance of Article 24

Article 24 of the Indian Constitution is a child labour prohibiting provision which states that no child
below 14 years of age shall be employed in any factory, mine or any hazardous occupation. This
particular provision was assumed to be a right that would hardly be effective in the absence of
legislation prohibiting and penalising its violation. This general assumption and understanding was
changed in the case of the People's Union for Democratic Rights and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors
(1982). The Apex Court in this case held that Article 24 must operate proprio vigore, which means
that the provision must operate independently by itself, even in the absence of any legislation in
furtherance of it.

Although the Apex Court clarified the independent operation of the provision in the above-
mentioned case, it is necessary to acknowledge the fact that there are other constitutional provisions
accompanying or aiding Article 24, either expressly or impliedly. In addition to the constitutional
provisions, other statutory provisions and separate legislation are also available that prohibit and
penalise child labour and is in furtherance of Article 24.

Constitutional Provisions
As mentioned earlier, there are few other constitutional provisions that expressly or impliedly aid
Article 24 of the Constitution. The directive principles of state policy which are mentioned in Part IV
of the Constitution, are a few such provisions that complement the fundamental rights and therefore
can be linked to it. Some of the provisions which aid or accompany the right against exploitation or
prohibition of child labour are as follows.

Article 39
Article 39 of the Constitution which directs the state to frame policies securing economic welfare of
the citizens and providing sufficient sources of subsistence to the people is a significant provision
that aids or accompanies Article 24. The provision under Clauses (e) and (f) expressly discusses the
prevention of exploitation of children and their protection.

Clause (e) of the Article directs the state to formulate a policy ensuring the prevention of forced
labour of every citizen including children of tender age. It provides for the prevention of abuse of
such children.

Clause (f) of the Article explicitly mentions the protection of childhood and youth against
exploitation and moral and material abandonment.

Articles 21, 21A and 45

Article 21A can be considered as a Constitutional provision that impliedly or indirectly goes with
Article 24 of the Constitution. Article 21A recognizes the right to education as a fundamental right.
According to this Article, the state shall provide for free and compulsory education of children aged 6
to 14 years.

Article 45 provides for childhood care and education to children below 6 years of age. This provision
was amended in 2002 with the introduction of Article 21A. The provision before the amendment was
similar to Article 21A as it provided for education to children until the completion of 14 years of age.

Therefore, Articles 21A and 45 can be collectively understood as indirectly calling for the prohibition
of child labour by promoting the education of children.

Similarly, Article 21 can also be construed as an aiding provision to Article 24 due to its wide scope
which has been enlarging over the past few decades. It is important to note that the right to
education which was provided under Article 21A, before its introduction in 2002, was recognized as a
part of the Right to life under Article 21 by the Supreme Court In Unnikrishnan, J.P. v. State of Andhra
Pradesh (1993). Therefore Article 21 is a significant provision that can be considered as an aiding
provision to Article 24.

Statutory Provisions in pursuance of Article 24 of the Indian Constitution

The fundamental right of children against employment guaranteed under Article 24 of the
Constitution is assisted by various statutory provisions that have been enacted by the legislature to
give effect to the Constitutional provision. The Parliament has in fact enacted a separate legislation
particularly dealing with the issue of Child labour. In addition to the specific legislation on child
labour, various other provisions from different legislations such as the Factories Act, 1948, Mines Act,
1952 etc., prohibit the employment of children. Besides, A National policy has been formulated by
the central government which consists of an action plan to tackle the issue of child labour in India.
The Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986
The Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 is the most significant
statute in the direction of prohibition of child labour which was enacted based on the
recommendations made by the Gurupadaswamy Committee. It is the primary legislation that is
enacted to prohibit and penalize child labour and exploitation of children. Section 3 of this Act
completely prohibits the exploitation and employment of children below 14 years of age and restricts
the employment of children between 14 to 18 years of age in certain hazardous occupations. Some
of the important characteristics of the Act are as follows :

One of the most important provisions of this Act is that it clearly defines an adolescent and a child
under Sections 2(1) and 2(11) respectively and therefore differentiates between the both. Section
2(i) defines adolescent as any person above 14 years and below 18 years of age whereas Section 2(ii)
defines the term child as any person who is below 14 years of age.

Section 3 prohibits employment of children completely with only two exceptions and Section 3A
prohibits employment of an adolescent in hazardous occupations. The two exceptions laid down by
Section 3 include non-hazardous family enterprises and the music industry and industry of other art
forms and sports except circus.

The Act penalizes the exploitation of children and the practice of child labour. Section 14 of this Act
imposes penalties for violation of Sections 3 and 3A of the Act. It provides for imprisonment of 6
months to two years or a fine of twenty to fifty thousand rupees or both in case of violating either of
the two provisions mentioned above. It also provides for imprisonment of 1 year to 3 years for
repeat offenders.

It provides for health and safety measures including weekly rest that must be ensured while
employing children and adolescents in permitted occupations.

The legislation under Section 148 establishes a fund for the rehabilitation and welfare of the children
rescued from child labour.

Furthermore, the statute mandates the maintenance and preservation of records containing
information regarding the children and adolescents employed along with the nature of work,
working hours etc. under Section 11. The statute also provides for the appointment of inspectors
under Section 17 who are empowered to inspect the premises of occupations and to examine the
records under Section 11.

National Policy on Child Labour

The National Policy on Child Labour was formulated for the first time in August 1987 after the
enactment of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act of 1986. The policy
contains an action plan for tackling child labour in the country. The formulated policy consists of 3
main aspects which include the following.

1.A legislative action plan for the strict enforcement of the Child and
Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 to prohibit the
employment of children in various occupations and to regulate the working
conditions for children who are employable under the Act.
2. Constitution of a core group by the Ministry of Labour and Employment for the
convergence of various programs and schemes formulated by the government for the welfare of the
children and the upliftment of their families.

The Convergence strategy includes the involvement of various ministries with

different roles.

Ministry of Women and Children to provide food and shelter homes for the
rescued children.
Ministry of Human Resource Development to provide mid-day meals and other
facilities under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan to the NCLP Scheme school children .
Ministries of Urban Housing and Poverty Alleviation and Rural Development to
cover the rescued children under their various schemes for economic
rehabilitation.
Ministry of Railways for spreading awareness and restricting the trafficking of
children.
3. Project-based plan of action for the welfare of children in areas of high
concentration of child labour. The National Child Labour Project (NCLP) Scheme is
one such project launched by the government.

Both, Central as well as state governments by adopting cooperative federalism, have been taking
significant steps and measures to tackle the issue of child labour. While the state government carries
out the task of enforcing the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act by
conducting inspections and raids, the Central government monitors the enforcement of the Act and
aids the state government with the help of the core group of convergence.

Other statutory provisions

In addition to separate legislation enacted for the prohibition of child labour, there are numerous
provisions across various legislations that prohibit the employment and exploitation of children in
certain hazardous and non-hazardous occupations and businesses. A few of such provisions are as
follows.

Section 67 of The Factories Act, 1948 prohibits the employment of children below 14 years of age in
any factory.

Section 45 of The Mines Act, 1952, prohibits the presence of persons below 18 years of age in any
mine.
Section 109 of The Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 prohibits the engagement of children below 16
years of age in any kind of shipping activity.

Section 21 of The Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 prohibits the employment of children below 14
years of age in any motor transport undertaking.

Section 24 of The Plantations Labour Act, 1951 prohibits the employment of children below 14 years
of age in any plantation.

Section 24 of The Beedi and Cigar Workers (Conditions of Employment) Act, 1966 prohibits
employment of children below 14 years of age in any industrial premises.

Section 3(a) of The Apprentices Act, 1961 states that a person shall not be qualified as an apprentice
unless is not less than 14 years of age for designated trades and not less than 18 years of age for
hazardous industries.

Besides these provisions in the legislations enacted by the Union Legislature, several other
state legislations also contain provisions prohibiting child labour.

International treaties against child labour

The international community after the Second World War has given great significance to the
protection of human rights. As a result, it has, from time to time recognised the importance of
protecting children against exploitation and therefore ensuring the protection of children's rights;
The same has been highlighted in a few significant multilateral international agreements or treaties.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Convention on the Rights of the
Child and the two Conventions adopted by the International Labour Organisation namely the
Minimum Age Convention, 1973 and the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 are some of
the important international instruments on child rights and child labour.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948

The first and foremost international document concerning child rights, or human rights in general is
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) that was adopted in 1948 with the aim of
protection of human rights across the globe. Although the document does not expressly mention the
rights of children against exploitation or prohibition of child labour, the significance of this
instrument cannot be disregarded. It is because the Universal Declaration of Human Rights serves as
a guiding light in respect of human rights. As a consequence of UDHR or in furtherance to it, several
other international treaties have been adopted that focus only on particular groups of people such as
women, children, refugees etc. Some of the provisions of UDHR which discuss child rights include
Articles 4, 25 and 26.

Article 4 does not particularly focus on children but provides for the right of every individual against
exploitation. It prohibits slavery, slave trade or servitude.

Article 25(2) provides that special care and assistance should be given to childhood and motherhood.
It states that every child must enjoy the same social protection.
Article 26 is similar to Articles 21A and 45 of the Indian Constitution. It recognizes every individual's
right to education. It states that Education must be free and compulsory at least till the elementary
and fundamental stages.

Therefore, though the Universal Declaration of Human Rights does not particularly focus on child
rights or the prohibition of child labour, it lays down a foundation for the adoption of other treaties
and agreements on the protection of human rights for particular groups.

International Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989

As mentioned above, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights led the way for the adoption of
other international conventions on the protection of the rights of particular groups. The International
Convention on the Rights of the Child is one such convention that has been adopted in furtherance
of UDHR for the protection of the rights of children. The International Convention on the Rights of
the Child (ICRC) is the first international document that came into existence, particularly for the
protection of child rights. It was adopted on 20th November 1989 and it came into force on 2nd
September 1990. The Convention in its entirety focuses on the protection of child rights and provides
for the same through various provisions of it. Different provisions provide for the protection of
different rights of the child. Some of the significant provisions of the Convention are as follows.

Article 3 of the Convention states that the best interests of children should be of primary
consideration in all actions concerning children.

Article 19 of the Convention directs the state parties to take appropriate measures for protecting
children against all forms of violence, abuse, negligence, maltreatment or exploitation.

Article 28 of the Convention is similar to Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and
Articles 21A and 45 of the Indian Constitution. It provides for children's right to education. The
Article directs the state parties to recognize the right of the child to education and to make primary
education compulsory and free to all.

Article 32 of the Convention explicitly focuses upon the child's right against exploitation and
prohibition of child labour. The provision directs the state parties to recognize the Article 32 of the
Convention explicitly focuses upon the child's right against exploitation and prohibition of child
labour. The provision directs the state parties to recognize the right of the child to be protected from
economic exploitation and from engaging in any work that may harm the child's overall growth and
education and is hazardous.

Article 34 requires the States to ensure the protection of children from all forms of sexual
exploitation and abuse.

Article 35 calls for appropriate national and international steps to prevent the trafficking of children.

Article 36 provides for the protection of children from all other forms of exploitation which impact
their welfare.

Article 39 of the Convention calls for appropriate measures to ensure the physical and psychological
recovery of a child victim of any form of abuse or exploitation.
The Convention is an important and substantial international document on the subject of child rights
which provides for some of the significant rights of children. It recognizes various rights of children
against all forms of exploitation and calls for measures to ensure the protection of the child's rights
and their proper overall growth and development.

Conventions of the International Labour Organization (ILO)

The two conventions adopted by the International Labour Organization (ILO) are the most concrete
and significant international documents that focus solely on the subject of child labour and the
employment of children. The two conventions adopted are namely

1. The Convention C138, The Minimum Age Convention, 1973; and

2. The Convention C182, The Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999.
India is the 170th member nation of the ILO to agree to Convention No. 138 which directs the state
parties to decide a minimum age for employment of children or young persons and It has also agreed
to Convention No. 182 which calls for the elimination of worst forms of child labour.

The Minimum Age Convention, 1973

The Minimum Age Convention, Convention No. 138 was adopted by the International Labour
Organization in Geneva in 1973. The Convention lays down the minimum age for children to be
employed. The Convention segregates different age groups and provides for limited employment of
children depending upon the age. Some of the important provisions of the Convention are as follows.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention prohibit forced child labour and give the
general principle that the minimum age for employment shall not be less than
the age of 15 or that of compulsory schooling or primary education.
Article 3 of the Convention lays down 18 years as the minimum for
employment of any work which is likely to risk the health or safety of any
young person.
Article 6 states that this convention does not apply to work done by children in
school or educational or technical learning. It further allows the employment of
children above 14 years of age following the conditions laid down by the
competent authority.
Article 7 of the Convention permits the employment of children belonging to
13 to 15 years of age for light work which does not in any way harm the health
and development of the child and affect the education of the child.
The Convention provides a general idea of the minimum age that should be taken into consideration
for the employment of children. It is the first and most fundamental instrument on child labour as it
specifically focuses upon that particular subject and It is also the first and foremost international
instrument adopted for children as it came into existence before the adoption of the International
Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989.

The Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999

Convention No. 182 adopted by the International Labour Organization for the elimination of the
worst forms of child labour in 1999 is the second most significant Convention on the subject of child
labour after the one adopted on minimum age in 1973. The Preamble of the Convention states that
there is a need for a new instrument for the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child
labour that would serve as a complement to the Minimum Age Convention adopted in 1973 which
remains a fundamental instrument on child labour. Article 2 of the Convention states that any person
below 18 years of age would be considered a child. As the preamble suggests, this instrument
focuses on the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour. Some of the key
provisions of the Convention are as follows.

Article 3 of the Convention says that the worst forms of child labour include
various acts such as slavery or servitude, trafficking, forced or compulsory
labour, use of children for illegal activities such as drug production and
trafficking, child pornography or prostitution or any work that is likely to cause
harm to the health, safety or morals of children.
Articles 6 and 7 of the Convention direct the state parties to take appropriate
measures to eliminate the worst forms of child labour as the priority. Article 7
further states that the member states must also focus on rescuing the children,
providing free education etc.
The Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention is an important document as is the primary instrument
that expressly calls for the abolition and elimination of child labour. The fact that the instrument is
binding on the member states makes it more significant as it allows the state parties to take
necessary action without any unjustifiable delay.

Both the Conventions adopted by the International Labour Organization are remarkable instruments
that recognize the need for the protection of children from exploitation and the elimination of the
evil practice of child labour.

The Minimum Age (Industry) Convention (Revised), 1937

The Minimum Age (Industry) Convention was Convention No. 59 adopted by the ILO.

Article 2 of the Convention states that children below 15 years of age shall not
be employed in any public or private industrial undertaking.
Important case laws
The Indian legal arena has witnessed several reforms recognizing the importance of protection of
human rights from time to time and the courts have played a crucial role in that process. Likewise,
the Indian courts have played a crucial role in the protection of children from exploitation and forced
child labour. The judiciary has from time to time highlighted the magnitude of child labour and its
causes and impacts. Some of the important judgements of the courts are as follows.

People's Union for Democratic Rights and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors, 1982
(Asiad Workers' Case)
The Asiad Workers' case was a PIL (Public Interest Litigation) before the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India for the enforcement of various provisions of labour
laws concerning the workmen employed for the construction of various
projects during the Asian Games.
A brief outline of the Asiad Workers' case
India was hosting the Asian Games that take place periodically in different parts
of Asia and therefore several construction projects were undertaken by the
Government of India which included the construction of flyovers, swimming
pools, hotels, Asian Games village complex etc. The construction projects were
allotted to various authorities such as the Delhi Development Authority, Delhi
Administration and the New Delhi Municipal Committee.
The Authorized authorities had hired contractors who were registered as
principal employers under Section 7 of the Contract Labour (Abolition and
Regulation) Act, 1970 to carry out the construction of the projects.
The Contractors subsequently hired workers/labourers through jamadars. The
Jamadars brought the workers from various parts of the country such as Uttar
Pradesh, Rajasthan and Orissa and got them employed under the contracts.
There were violations of several labour laws including the Minimum Wages Act,
1948 and the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976. There was also a violation of
Article 24 of the Constitution as the employers had employed children below
14 years of age for the construction work.
The Petitioners alleged that there was severe violation of various laws and the
workers were not even provided with proper living conditions, medical and
other facilities. They pointed out that the violations resulted in the exploitation
of workers employed for the construction work.
The Petitioners pointed out the aforementioned violations relying upon the
report of a team of three social scientists and who filed a PIL before the
Hon'ble Supreme Court for the enforcement of labour laws.
Key legal issues
Whether there was a violation of Article 24 of the Constitution and other
provisions of various labour laws?
Judgement
The Hon'ble Supreme Court, relying upon the affidavit filed by the Union
Government, observed a violation of several provisions of various labour laws
by private individuals
the contractors but not by the state. The Court observed that whenever any
work is carried out by the government either departmentally or through
contractors, the governmental authorities including the public sector
corporations must take care that the provisions of the labour laws are strictly
followed without any violation.
The Court about the violation of the Employment of Children Act, 1938, upheld
the respondent's contention that construction activity is unfortunately not
included under the schedule of the Act. But the Court held that the omission
must be set right by the government immediately. The Court further held that
construction work is a hazardous occupation and therefore the employment of
children below 14 years of age must be prohibited. The Court observed that it
would align with provisions of Convention 59 of the ILO which has been ratified
by India.
Furthermore, the Court held that apart from the aforementioned International
Convention, Article 24 of the Indian Constitution provides that no child below
14 years of age shall be employed in any hazardous occupation. The court held
that Article 24 as a constitutional provision must operate proprio vigore
(independently) even in the absence of any appropriate legislation prohibiting
the employment of children in construction work which is certainly a hazardous
occupation.
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, 1997
This case is a PIL filed by an NGO before the Hon'ble Supreme Court seeking to
issue a writ of mandamus directing the state government to stop child labour
in the carpet industry in the state of Uttar Pradesh.

Brief facts
The Petitioners through the instant PIL contend that the employment of
children below 14 years of age in any industry is violative of Article 24 of the
Constitution.
The petitioners contend that the carpet weavers across the state, especially in
Varanasi, Mirzapur, Jaunpur and Allahabad have employed children in the
carpet industry resulting in a violation of the fundamental right of the children
guaranteed under Article 24 of the Constitution.
The Court appointed a committee in August 1991 to visit various places across
the state, particularly those mentioned by the petitioners to find out whether
the children were being exploited. The committee submitted its report in
November 1991.
The report highlighted the large-scale exploitation to which the children were
subjected and it said that the children were wrongfully forced to work as
bonded labour in the carpet industry against their wishes.
The findings of the report said that children ranging from the age of 5 to 12
years were kidnapped from Bihar and were made to work in the carpet
industry in Uttar Pradesh.
The report highlighted that 42% of the workforce in 882 carpet weaving looms
was of children below 14 years of age. The report further said that 95% of
those children belonged to the tender age of 6 to 11 years.
Furthermore, the committee found that the children were made to work all day
and were treated as slaves. The report also highlighted that the children were
subjected to physical torture which was evident by the marks of violence.

Issues
1. Whether the employment of children below 14 years of age is violative of
Article 24 of the Constitution?

2. Whether the omission on the part of the state to provide the facilities and
opportunities to the children is a deprivation of constitutional mandates
provided under Articles 45, 39(e) and (f), 21 and 14?

Judgement
The Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the exploitation of childhood is
detrimental to the democracy as well as the social stability, unity and integrity
of the nation. The Court in this judgement stressed the causes of child labour
and the impact of it on a child's growth and development. The Court referred
to various provisions of different international instruments on human and child
rights, child labour etc., including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
and the International Convention on the Rights of the Child. It also highlighted
the widened scope of Article 21 which has been expanded to include various
rights as fundamental rights including the right to education, right to health
etc.
The Court held that it is binding upon the state to provide all the facilities and
opportunities provided under various Articles of the Constitution; particularly
under Article 39(e) and (f). The Court observed that a total ban on child labour
would be unrealistic and counterproductive. Therefore, it has to be eliminated
through well-planned development, poverty alleviation and employment of
children. It further observed that constructive and realistic steps and actions
are necessary to be taken to ensure that the children from poor, marginalised
and weaker sections of society are allowed to reform and develop their
personalities educationally, intellectually and culturally along with the
enjoyment of leisure.
The Court held that child labour has to be progressively banned while evolving
simultaneous alternatives such as providing education, health facilities,
nutrient food, shelter and other means of livelihood with self-respect and
dignity of person. The court affirmed the observations made in M.C. Mehta v.
State of Tamil Nadu (1996).
M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1996 (Child labour matter)
The instant case is a petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by Mr. M.C.
Mehta, a lawyer after the fundamental right of children under Article 24 of the
Constitution was violated as children were employed in the cracker and
firework industry in Sivakasi.

Brief facts
The Petitioner, who is a lawyer, filed a petition before the Hon'ble Supreme
Court under Article 32 of the Constitution after noticing that the fundamental
right of the children guaranteed by Article 24 of the Constitution was violated.
The petition was then disposed of in 1990 by the Court by giving certain
directions to improve the quality of life of around 2941 children employed in
the firework factories, while it had also noted that it is a hazardous industry
giving rise to accidents including fatal cases. It had also constituted a
committee to oversee the directions given by the court.
The Court subsequently took suo-motu cognizance/by itself in the present
matter when news of an unfortunate accident in one of the factories in Sivakasi
was published
The Court was informed by the state government that the deceased was a 39-
year-old person.
The Court directed the state government regarding the payment of
compensation and it constituted an advocates' commission to visit the area
and prepare a comprehensive report. The commission submitted the report in
November 1991.

Judgement
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the instant case observed that the issue of child
labour has to be dealt with in a broad manner as a national problem but not as
limited only to any particular region such as Sivakasi. The Court observed that
poverty is one of the basic causes of child labour.
The Court first noted the Constitutional provisions that may be relevant to the
issue of child labour or may be considered as a part of the solution to the issue.
The Court noted Articles 24, 39(e) and (f), 41, 45 and 47 of the Constitution. It
observed that Article 24 is the fundamental right and even Article 45 has been
given great significance by the court by ruling it as a fundamental right in the
Unnikrishnan, J.P. v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1993) Judgement. The Court
further noted Article 37 to observe that even though the other provisions are
part of directive principles of state policy, they are fundamental in the
governance of the country and are obligatory on the organs of the state. The
Hon'ble Supreme Court also observed the international commitment made by
India by ratifying the International Convention on the Rights of the Child. The
Court noted that India has committed to progressively implement Article 32 of
the Convention. The Court also noted the various statutory provisions that
have been enacted to prohibit the employment of children in different
occupations.
The Court ruled that every employer must be asked to pay a compensation of
Rs. 20,000 for every child employed in contravention of the provisions of the
Child and Adolescent (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986. The Court held
that the inspectors appointed under that Act should ensure that the
compensation is paid by the employer to a fund known as the Child Labour
Rehabilitation-cum-Welfare Fund. The Court observed that all the
Constitutional Provisions must be implemented by the appropriate government
as defined under Section 2(f) of the aforementioned Act.
0