Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Extreme poverty, lack of opportunity for gainful employment and intermittancy of income and low standards of living are the man reasons for the wide prevalence of child labour. Though it is possible to identify child labour in the organised sector, which form a minuscule of the total child labour, the problem relates mainly to the unorganised sector where utmost attention needs to be paid.

The problem is universal but in our case it is more crucial.

Magnitude of the problem.

10. Sivakasi has ceased to be the only centre employing child labour. The malady is no longer confined to that place.

11. A write-up in Indian Express of 25.10.1996 has described Bhavnagar as another Sivaskasi in making, as that town of about 4 lakh population has a t least 13,000 children employed in 300 different industries. The problem of child labour in India has indeed spread it fang far and wide. This would be apparent from the chart which finds place in the commendable work of a social anthropologist of United Nations Volunteer, Neera Burra, published under the title "Born to Work : Child Labour in India", as at pages XXII to XXIV of the book. It is useful to extract that chart. It is a below:-

Estimates from various non-governmental sources as to the actual number working children range from 44 million to 100 million.

(Figures of 1981 census have been quoted because the report relating to 1991 census has not yet been made public. It is understood that the same is under publication).

12. The aforesaid profile shows that child labour by now is an all-India evil, though its acuteness differs from area to area. So, without a concerted effort, both of the Central government and various State governments, this ignominy would not get wiped out. We have, therefore, thought it fit to travel beyond the confines of Sivakasi to which place this petition initially related. In our view, it would be more appropriate to deal with the issue in wider spectrum and broader perspective taking it as a national problem and not appertaining to any one region of the country. So, we would address ourselves as to how we can, and are required to, tackle the problem of child labour, solution of which is necessary to build a better India.

26. Of the aforesaid causes, it seems to us that the poverty is basic reason which compels parents of a child, despite their unwillingness, to get it employed. The Survey Report of the Ministry of Labour (supra) had also so stated. Otherwise, no parents, specially no mother, would like that a tender aged child should toil in a factory in a difficult condition, instead of it enjoying its childhood at home the paternal gaze.

What to do?

27. It may be that the problem would be taken care of to some extent by insisting on compulsory education. Indeed, Neera thinks that if there is at all a blueprint for tackling the problem of child labour, it is education. Even if it were to be so, the child of a poor parent would not receive education, if per force it has to earn to make the family meet both the ends. therefore, unless the family is assured of income allude, problem of child labour would hardly get solved; and it is this vital question which has remained almost unattended. We are, however, of the view that till an alternative income is assured to the family, the question of abolition of child labour would really remain a will-o'-the wisp. Now, if employment of child below that age of 14 is a constitutional indication insofar as work in any factory or mine or engagement in other hazardous work, and if it has to be seen that all children are given education till the age of 14 years in view of this being a fundamental right now, and if the wish embodied in Article 39(e) that the tender age of children is not abused and citizens are not forced by economic necessity to enter avocation unsuited to their age, and if children are to be given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and childhood is to be protected against exploitation as visualised by Article 39(f), it seems to us that the least we ought to do is see to the fulfillment of legislative intendment behind enactment of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986. Taking guidance therefrom, we are of the view that the offending employer must be asked to pay compensation for every child employed in contravention of the provisions of the Act a sum of Rs.20,000/-; and the Inspectors, whose appointment is visualised by section 17 to secure compliance with the provisions of the Act, should do this job. The inspectors appointed under section 17 would see that for each child employed in violation of the provisions of the Act, the concerned employer pays Rs.20,000/- which sum could be deposited in a fund to be known as Child Labour Rehabilitation-cum-Welfare Fund. The liability of the employer would not cease even if he would desire to disengage the child presently employed. It would perhaps be appropriate to have such a fund district wise or area wise. The fund so generated shall form corpus whose income shall be used only for the concerned child. The quantum could be the income earned on the corpus deposited qua the child. To generate greater income, fund can be deposited in high yielding scheme of any nationalised bank or other public body.