Zahid Hussain vs The State Of Bihar
2023 Latest Caselaw 3696 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                      Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7980 of 2020
     ======================================================

Zahid Hussain S/o Md. Khalid Hussain R/o Madarsa Chowk, Mohania, ward no. 2, P.S.- Palasi, Dist- Araria.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar Represented by its Chief Secretary, Old Secretariat, Patna- 800015 Bihar.

2. The District Magistrate, District- Gaya Bihar- 823001

3. The District Magistrate, District- Nawada Bihar.

4. The District Magistrate, District- Supaul Bihar.

5. Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, Represented by its Secretary, Shram Shakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi- 110001.

6. The Principal Secretary, Labour Department, Govt. of Bihar.

7. The Labour Commissioner, Govt. of Bihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 22971 of 2019 ====================================================== Nirmal Gorana Son of Shri. Mangi Lal Gorana Resident of 243, Main Road Badarpur Village, Delhi- 110044.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. Union of India Through its Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Jaisalmer House, 26 Man Singh Road, New Delhi-110011.

2. State of Bihar Through its Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Main Secretariat, Patna- 800015.

3. State of Bihar Through its Additional Chief Secretary, Labour Resources Department, Government of Bihar Niyojan Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna- 800001.

4. Labour Commissioner Government of Bihar, Labour Resources Department, Government of Bihar Niyojan Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna- 800001.

5. District Magistrate Banka.

6. District Magistrate Nalanda.

7. District Magistrate Patna.

8. District Magistrate Sheikhpura.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7980 of 2020) Patna High Court CWJC No.7980 of 2020 dt.11-08-2023

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sambhav Gupta, Advocate Mr. Navnit Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sanju Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Alok Ranjan, A.C. to AAG-5 For the UOI : Dr. K.N. Singh, ASG Mr. Anshuman Singh, Advocate

(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 22971 of 2019) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashwat, Advocate Mr. Akash Keshav, Advocate Mr. Sachin, Advocate For the UOI : Mr. Sujit K. Sinha, CGC For the State : Mr. Rohitabh Das, AC to AAG-13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 11-08-2023

1. Both the writ petitions agitate the cause of bonded

labourers and the requirement to pay compensation to those who

are released from such bonded labour. We extract hereunder

Order No. 26 dated 05.05.2023:-

"The grievance raised in the above writ petition filed in the wake of the pandemic is that 180 bonded labourers who were rescued from such travails were not paid compensation as per the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) as brought out by the Central Government.

The learned counsel specifically refers to clause 3.5 of the SOP at page-84 of C.W.J.C. No.7980 of 2020, that on such detection of bonded labourers, the funds have to be expeditiously given to them as compensation.

In the present case, it is submitted that though the funds were given to all bonded labourers who were released from such travails, the compensation was delayed by around 6 to 7 years. It is also pointed out that the prosecution, which should have a deterrent effect in continuance of such bonded labour, also has not Patna High Court CWJC No.7980 of 2020 dt.11-08-2023

been proceeded with alacrity.

The learned counsel would also refer us to the scheme produced as Annexure-3 in C.W.J.C. No.7980 of 2020 and specifically clause 5 (xiii), while learned Government Advocate would refer to clause- 5 (xiv) of the scheme. Both of which are extracted hereunder:

"(xiii) A Bonded Labour Rehabilitation Fund shall be created at the District level by each State with a permanent corpus of at least Rs.10 Lakhs at the disposal of the District Magistrate which should be renewable. This fund will be utilized for extending immediate help to the released bounded labourers. The entire penalties recovered from the perpetuators of the bounded labour upon conviction, may be deposited in this special fund.

(xiv) Immediate assistance of at least Rs.20,000/- (as amended on 17.01.2017) shall be provided by the District Administration to the rescued person out of the District Bounded Labour Rehabilitation Fund at the disposal of the District Magistrate. Where the DM is satisfied that a particular rescued person requires more than Rs.20,000/- (as amended on 17.01.2017) he or she may disburse such higher amount as deemed fit, but limited to the maximum entitlement prescribed under this scheme. Any such advance amount shall be deducted from the Central cash assistance amount."

As we see from the above extracts, a Bonded Labour Rehabilitation Fund has to be created at the District level by the State with a permanent corpus of at least Rs. 10 Lakhs at the disposal of the District Magistrate from which Rs.5000/- or anything more up to Rs.10,000/-, later enhanced to Rs.20,000/- and now to Rs.30,000/-, has to be paid by the District Magistrate, as compensation to such bonded Patna High Court CWJC No.7980 of 2020 dt.11-08-2023

labourers released from the bond.

There is no clarity as to whether the Central Government initially provides the funds or the State Government is to provide the funds and then get it reimbursed by the Central Government.

We are definitely of the opinion that the District Magistrate cannot be obliged to source the funds and it has to either come from the State Government or the Central Government and as and when it is expended for paying compensation, the same should be replenished by the Governments.

In such circumstances, we direct the Central Government as also the State Government to place affidavits on record as to the practice followed in providing Rs.10 lakhs to be kept at the disposal of the District Magistrate, to alleviate the travails of a bonded labourer on detection, who should also be released from such bond. We would also require the State Government to place on record whether the dedicated funds of Rs.10 Lakhs is provided to each District Magistrate for the purpose of compensating the bonded labourers as and when it is detected.

As far as the prosecution is concerned, the learned counsel also submits that where it is linked with other offences, though a summary trial is directed under the Bihar Bonded Labour System Abolition Act, there is a summary trial provided invariably it is delayed. There can be no expeditious trial directed by us in such circumstance and necessarily it would have to follow the procedure under the Cr.P.C.

However, we are of the opinion that with respect to the funds being made available to the District Magistrate, there should be an affidavit filed both by the Central Government and the State Government, which shall provide details as required by us. The same shall be filed within a period of four weeks from today.

Post on 14.07.2023."

Patna High Court CWJC No.7980 of 2020 dt.11-08-2023

2. Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 have filed a

supplementary counter affidavit dated 13.07.2023 through the

Labour Superintendent, Patna. Annexure-A is the list of corpus

fund status in all the districts under the Central Sector Scheme

for Rehabilitation of Bonded Labour, 2016. It is stated that the

concerned District Magistrates periodically submit details of the

corpus fund available and the payments made, based on which

reports the State authorities seek reimbursement from the

Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India,

New Delhi. On receipt of reimbursement, the amounts are

allocated to the concerned districts to maintain the corpus fund.

It is also pointed out that deficiency seen in the corpus fund of

certain districts occurred only for complying with the directions

of this Court when required amounts were transferred to Gaya,

Nawada and Jehanabad Districts from other District Corpus

Funds. It is undertaken in the affidavit that the respondents are

taking effective steps for payment of Immediate Assistance

under the Central Sector Scheme on a priority basis to the

Bonded Labourers released from such bonds.

3. We are satisfied that the Public Interest Litigation

has served its purpose. We only caution the District authorities Patna High Court CWJC No.7980 of 2020 dt.11-08-2023

from acting with alacrity on detection of bonded labour,

payment of compensation and taking penal action against those

responsible for the bonded labour.

4. We record the undertaking made by the

Respondents and dispose of the writ petitions.

(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)

(Partha Sarthy, J) P.K.P./-

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date          18.08.2023
Transmission Date