People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India (1982) 3 SCC 235

PEOPLE’S UNION FOR DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS V. UNION OF INDIA

ISSUE:

Whether this petition is maintainable against Union of India, Delhi Administration and Delhi Development Authority when in actual the offending parties are private contractors?
Whether this petition is maintainable as there is no breach of fundamental rights of labourers but of ordinary rights under labour laws?

RULE:

A principal employer’s duty to uphold labour laws is non-transferable, making them accountable for any contractor violations.
Under Articles 14, 21, 23, and 24 of the Constitution, all workers have the right to dignity, fair wages, and humane working conditions.
Violations of these protections breach workers’ fundamental rights, placing sole responsibility on the principal employer to ensure compliance and safeguard worker welfare.

FACTS:

People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR) filed a public interest litigation before the Supreme Court based on the findings of a fact-finding team that investigated the working conditions of labourers engaged in construction projects for the 1982 Asian Games in Delhi.
The construction was overseen by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), New Delhi Municipal Committee (NDMC), and Delhi Administration, which hired contractors to employ labourers.
These contractors, in turn, engaged intermediaries, known as Jamadars, to hire workers from different regions of India.
The workers, including children under 14, were paid below the minimum wage, worked under hazardous conditions, and lacked adequate amenities.
PUDR argued that these practices violated multiple labour laws and fundamental rights, including Articles 14, 21, 23, and 24 of the Indian Constitution.
The findings were presented to Justice Bhagwati in a letter, which he treated as a writ petition, prompting the Supreme Court to issue notices to the Union of India, the DDA, and Delhi Administration.
On November 16, 1981, the Supreme Court formally took up the case, recognizing the urgency of addressing the labourer’s woes considering that the Asian Games were nigh around the corner.

HELD:

The Supreme Court held that the Respondent authorities, namely the DDA, NDMC, and the Delhi Administration, bear the ultimate responsibility for ensuring compliance with labour laws governing the construction projects for the 1982 Asian Games.
The Supreme Court held that despite delegating the hiring and management of labourers to contractors, the Respondent authorities remain “principal employers” and are thus accountable for any statutory violations affecting workers’ rights.
Under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, specifically Section 20, and the Inter-State Migrant Workmen Act, 1979, particularly Sections 17 and 18, the Supreme Court held that the Respondent authorities must ensure adequate amenities, safety, and compliance with legal standards for labourers hired for these projects.
The Supreme Court further determined that the actions and omissions of the Respondent authorities violated the workers’ fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
The fundamental rights infringed by the Respondent authorities included Article 24, which prohibits child labour in hazardous employment, Article 23, which prohibited forced labour without adequate remuneration, and Article 14, which necessitated equal pay for equal work.
On the basis of these findings, the apex Court directed the Respondent authorities to ensure immediate compliance with the labour laws as a matter of fundamental rights.
The Supreme Court mandated that the Respondent authorities take necessary measures to uphold the rights of workers to fair wages, equal pay, and safe working conditions, emphasizing the constitutional protections afforded to labourers.
The Supreme Court allowed the writ petition.