People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India (1982) 3 SCC 235
Who answers for worker rights at State-run projects—contractors or the State as principal employer?
Quick Summary
Holding: The State bodies (DDA/NDMC/Delhi Administration) are principal employers. They must ensure labour-law compliance even when work is done through contractors.
Paying below minimum wage, using child labour, or forcing work violates Arts. 14, 21, 23, 24. The PIL was maintainable; immediate compliance was ordered.
Issues
- Is a PIL maintainable against State authorities when violations are by private contractors?
- Do the facts show breaches of fundamental rights (Arts. 14/21/23/24) and not merely statutory rights?
Rules
- Principal employer duty: Non-delegable. Accountability remains with the supervising State entity.
- Articles 14, 21, 23, 24: Equality, dignity, freedom from forced labour, and ban on hazardous child labour.
- Statutes: Contract Labour Act s.20; Inter-State Migrant Workmen Act ss.17–18 → amenities, safety, fair pay.
Facts (Timeline)
Arguments
Respondents (State Bodies)
- Contractors were the employers; State cannot be blamed for their defaults.
- Alleged breaches were under labour statutes, not fundamental rights.
Petitioner (PUDR)
- State entities are principal employers; duty is non-transferable.
- Underpaying, child labour, coercion breach Arts. 14, 21, 23, 24.
- Courts must ensure immediate compliance at public worksites.
Judgment
The Supreme Court allowed the writ. DDA, NDMC, and Delhi Administration bear ultimate responsibility for legal compliance at these sites.
The Court treated the violations as fundamental rights breaches and ordered immediate steps to ensure fair wages, equal pay, safety, and ban on child/forced labour.
Ratio Decidendi
State authorities supervising public projects are principal employers. They must secure compliance with labour laws and constitutional guarantees; contractor breaches are attributable to them.
Why It Matters
- Anchors labour protections as fundamental rights at State works.
- Prevents outsourcing accountability through contractor chains.
- Strengthens equal pay and anti-exploitation norms on public projects.
Key Takeaways
- Principal employer duty is non-delegable.
- Arts. 14/21/23/24 protect wages, dignity, and child-safety at work.
- Courts can use PIL to enforce worker rights quickly.
Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook
Mnemonic: “PUDR = PROTECT UNDERPAID DURING RENOVATIONS”
- Who? Principal employer stays responsible.
- What? Equal pay, no child/forced labour, safe work.
- How? Enforce statutes + Articles 14/21/23/24.
IRAC Outline
| Issue | Rule | Application | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|
| PIL maintainability vs State when contractors offend? | Principal employer duty; Arts. 14/21/23/24; Contract Labour Act s.20; ISMW Act ss.17–18. | State entities oversaw projects; must ensure legal and constitutional compliance. | PIL maintainable; State liable to act. |
| Are only statutory rights involved? | Fundamental rights include equality, dignity, and freedom from forced/child labour. | Sub-minimum pay and child labour trigger Arts. 14/21/23/24. | Fundamental rights breached; orders issued. |
Glossary
- Principal Employer
- The State/authority that engages contractors; legally responsible for compliance at the site.
- Equal Pay for Equal Work
- Workers doing the same work must be paid alike, subject to lawful classification.
- Forced Labour (Art. 23)
- Work extracted without fair remuneration/choice—constitutionally prohibited.
FAQs
Popular & Recent Post
Comment
Nothing for now