Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

15. The respondent no.1 is continuously working in the institution and the said institution is also taking the service of the respondent no.1 but the salary has been denied which is contrary to the constitutional obligation. It is evident from the record that the petitioner has continuously work in the institution as a Teacher for the period in question, therefore, the respondent no. 1 legitimately expects to be adequately compensated for the work he has done.

16. Article 23 of the Constitution of India prohibits ''Begar', which reads as under:

"23. Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour.

(1) Traffic in human beings and begar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and any contravention of this provision shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law.

(2) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from imposing compulsory service for public purposes, and in imposing such service the State shall not make any discrimination on grounds only of religion, race, caste or class or any of them."

17. The aforesaid Article envisages to solve three unsocial practices prevailing in the India society namely;

i) Traffic in human beings;

ii) Begar; and

iii) similar forms of forced labour

18. In the present context, we are concerned with one of the evils of ''Begar.' The word ''Begar' is of Indian origin and has been adopted in the English vocabulary. It is understood to be a labour or service which a person is forced to give without receiving any remuneration for it. In other words extracting labour or service from a person by the government or by person in power without giving remuneration for it amounts to ''Begar.' ''Begar' can take different forms such as forced labour, taking work without remuneration or taking work without paying adequate remuneration or remuneration less than the minimum wages.

19. It is very difficult to formulate a precise definition of the word 'begar', but there can be no doubt that it is a form of forced labour under which a person is compelled to work without receiving any remuneration. Molesworth describes 'begar' as "labour or service exacted by a government or person in power without giving remuneration for it." Wilson's Glossary of Judicial and Revenue Terms gives the following meaning of the word 'begar': "a forced labourer, one pressed to carry burthens for individuals or the public. Under the old system, when pressed for public service, no pay was given. The Begari, though still liable to be pressed for public objects, now receives pay: Forced labour for private service is prohibited." Begar may therefore be loosely described as labour or service which a person is forced to give without receiving any remuneration for it. That was the meaning of the word 'begar' accepted by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in S. Vasudevan v. S.D. Mital: AIR 1962 Bom 53. 'Begar' is thus clearly a form of forced labour. Now it is not merely 'begar' which is unconstitutionally (sic) prohibited by Article 23 but also all other similar forms of forced labour. This Article strikes at forced labour in whatever form it may manifest itself, because it is violative of human dignity and is contrary to basic human values