'Forced Labour Prevalent Even After 75 Years Of Independence': J&K&L High Court On Class-IV Employee's Rs 500 Annual Wage

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that the payment of wages at the rate of Rs. 500 per year since 1998 to a government school employee is clearly a form of Forced Labour, which is strictly prohibited under Article 23 of the Constitution of India.

"This Court being a custodian of the fundamental rights cannot shut its eyes to the injustice carried out against the petitioner by an act of the State, which claims to achieve socio economic equality as the cherished dreams of the Constitution," said a single bench in an order dated September 19.

The bench comprising Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal was hearing a contempt petition in which the petitioner prayed for initiating proceedings against authorities including Director School Education, Jammu for non-compliance of a September 2013 order directing the authorities to consider payment of wages as envisaged under Minimum Wages Act to the petitioner. 

The court on April 20 had again directed the Director School Education to release immediately the minimum wages in terms of Minimum Wages Act in favour of the petitioner but the order was not complied with. The petitioner has been working since 28.10.1998 as Waterman-cum-Sweeper in the Government Model Middle School, Mahanpur.

"This is a sheer case of exploitation to a poor person by the respondents, where the respondents are extracting the work from the petitioner since 1998 and as on date and the petitioner is being paid Rs. 500/- per year which is insufficient to cater the daily needs of the petitioner and it shocks the conscience of the Court that a person even after 72 years of independence continue to suffer exploitation," said the court. 

The court said since the authorities continue to "exploit" the petitioner, they were under a legal obligation to regularise his services or should have paid him the minimum wages. It further said the Director School Education Jammu has neither complied with the court direction nor has appeared in person despite being directed to do so.

"... which means that he is taking the Court order casually and and instead he has filed an application for seeking exemption which is declined keeping in view his conduct," said the bench, adding it was a fit case where proceedings can be initiated against the officer as he was in a recurring contempt.

The court granted the officer final opportunity to comply with its order in letter and spirit and asked for a compliance report by September 26. "Respondent No. 2 shall appear in person along with the record of the list of contingent paid workers/local fund paid workers approved for regularization in terms of SRO-308 of 2008 of Jammu Division from 1998 till date as directed by this Court vide order dated 20.04.2022," said the court further.

The bench also said the case highlights the manner in which the practice of forced labour is prevalent in country even after 72 years of independence and that helpless people similar to the petitioner continue to suffer the exploitation "willingly". 

Referring to Article 23 of the Constitution, the court said:

"This article is designed to protect the individual against any form of forced labour practiced by any person and has its genesis in the socio-economic conditions of the people at the time the constitution came to be enacted, with a view to ensure socio and economic justice to the large masses of people living in abject poverty, destitution and slavery."