SANJIT ROY versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

SANJIT ROY versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

It is unconstitutional to pay famine relief workers less than the notified minimum wage of Rs. 7 per day, regardless of the quantum of work turned out, as the exemption under Section 3 of the Rajasthan Famine Relief Works Employees (Exemption from Labour Laws) Act, 1964 cannot override the protections under Articles 14 and 23 of the Constitution. Payment below minimum wage is forced labour and violates equality.

Parties
Petitioner: Sanjit Roy; Respondent: State of Rajasthan
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 January 1983
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition / Final Decision
Outcome
Petition allowed
Legal Topics
Minimum Wages, Forced Labour, Equality Before Law, Famine Relief Works, Exemption From Labour Laws
Constitutional Law Labour Law Minimum Wages Forced Labour Equality Before Law Famine Relief Works Exemption From Labour Laws

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sanjit Roy

Petitioner

State of Rajasthan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether payment of wages below the notified minimum wage for famine relief workers is constitutional under Section 3 of the Rajasthan Famine Relief Works Employees (Exemption from Labour Laws) Act, 1964.
  2. 2 Whether the system adopted by the Public Works Department for wage payment violates Articles 14 and 23 of the Constitution of India.

Ratio Decidendi

It is unconstitutional to pay famine relief workers less than the notified minimum wage of Rs. 7 per day, regardless of the quantum of work turned out, as the exemption under Section 3 of the Rajasthan Famine Relief Works Employees (Exemption from Labour Laws) Act, 1964 cannot override the protections under Articles 14 and 23 of the Constitution. Payment below minimum wage is forced labour and violates equality.

Court Disposition

Petition allowed

Orders

  • Respondent directed to pay each workman employed in Madanganj Harmara Road the difference between the minimum wage of Rs. 7 per day and the actual wage paid during their employment, with payment to be made within two months.
  • Respondent to submit a report to the Supreme Court setting out payments made and names of workmen by April 30, 1983.