T CHAKKALACKAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present proceedings which were commenced some time in june 1985 a Vigilance Committee was appointed in October 1985, and thereafter orders were made from time to time. We do not consider it necessary to make a resume of those orders but it would suffice to say that after the said orders were made a survey was undertaken of the persons alleged to be in bonded labour. Mr K. D. Dewan was asked to visit the villages mentioned in the previous orders of the court to identify the bonded labourers and submit a report to this court. Pursuant to the said order he submitted a report by his forwarding letter dated 31/08/1986. According to the said report he claims to have spent 12 full days and nights and to have interviewed scores of labourers alleged to be bonded labourers. He was in a position to record the statements of as many as 169 labourers and he came to the conclusion that they were living in appalling conditions and in abject poverty. He gave a list of various panchayats in which the 169 labourers interviewed by him were located. His detailed report gives an indication of the duration of bondage and in some cases it would appear that after the death of the father who worked as bonded labour, his son was required to work for the same employer (malik) since the debt incurred by his father was outstanding. The subsequent order made by this court on 25/11/1986 shows that mr Verghese had given a list of 350 persons with particulars drawn on the basis of the Deputy Collector's report identifying the bonded labourers. Mr Jayanarayan who appeared on behalf of the government did not dispute the correctness of the statement since it was drawn from a responsible officer's report and stated that if these 350 persons werefound bonded they have to be released and rehabilitated as required by the scheme of the statute i. e. the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act. 1976. According to Section 6 of the said Act on the commencement thereof every obligation of a bonded labourer to repay any bonded debt. or such part of any bonded debt as remains unsatisfied immediately before such commencement shall be deemed to have been extinguished. The expressions 'bonded debt' and 'bonded labour' have been defined in section 2 of the Act. It would, therefore, appear that at that stage the fact that out of 997 persons alleged to have been kept in bondage by different employers under different panchayats at least 350 were identified in regard to whom Mr Jayanarayan did not raise any dispute before the court. Implementation of the provisions of law was directed and the district and Sessions Judge, West Champaran, Bettiah was charged with the duty to look into the matter and ensure their rehabilitation and undertake other relief measures considered appropriate. The District Judge submitted an interim report to this court on 9/02/1989. After this interim report was received counsel were heard thereon but no final order was passed and the District Judge's final report was awaited. That final report dated 23/12/1991 has now been received. It would appear from the final report that out of 350 bonded labourers: the earlier report was in respect of 181+32 labourers totalling 213 detailed in Annexures 'b' and 'c', Annx. 'd' related to 85 persons and Annx. 'a' related to 57 persons and they were summoned by the District Judge. Fifty-nine employers were also summoned but only 16 turned up. By an order dated 22/11/1991, the State of Bihar was directed to clarify the following three points:

(2.) Be that as it may, it does appear from the proceedings before us as well as from Annx. 'a' to the interim report that several labourers were working under bondage and after the Deputy Collector's survey, that they were forced to refund the bonded debts. As pointed out earlier by virtue of Section 6 on the commencement of the Act the debt stood wiped out and it was obligatory on the part of the employer to return any property of the bonded labourer held by him. It also seems clear from the documents on record that even according to the State of Bihar certain persons who were in bondage were released after the Act came into force. We, however do not know if any release certificate was issued to each bonded labourer on release. We are told such release certificates have to be issued under government instructions. If that is correct and if the certificates have not been issued, they ought to be issued. But after section 6 came into operation in regard to bonded labourers whose debt stood extinguished by virtue thereof, if they continued to work under the same or any other employer, the question whether they were paid wages as required by law, e. g. the Minimum Wages Act, would have to be considered and if the same had not been done that would have to be done. Section 9 of the Act provides that no creditor shall accept any payment against any bonded debt which has been extinguished or deemed to have been extinguished or fully satisfied by virtue of the provisions of the Act. Whoever, contravenes this provision is made liable to punishment for a term which may extend to three years and also with fine. As stated earlier the interim report of the District Judge, Annx. 'a' thereto in particular, makes a mention about forced refund of bonded debt after the Act came into force. Such cases would have to be investigated and if contravention of Section 9 is noticed, necessary action would have to be taken by the state government.

(3.) Both sides, therefore, agree that further action is necessary for implementing this court's order. They state that Mr K. B. Saxena who is presently the Additional Chief secretary of the State of Bihar and who is familiar with this area may be appointed to carry out the further work to ensure complete implementation of court's orders. Mr Verghese states that he has already sounded him and he has agreed to take this responsibility. We, therefore, direct his appointment. Mr Verghese will prepare a set of orders passed by this court from time to time and deliver them to him to enable him to appreciate what further action for implementation of court's orders is expected of him. Copies of theinterim report as well as the final report prepared by the District Judge will also be taken out by the State government and delivered to him. We would like him to undertake this task and complete the same as expeditiously as possible and suggest ways and means for rehabilitating the bonded labourers identified by him. We think that it would be proper to give him six month's time to complete the task. He may submit his report to this court within six months from the receipt of the court order making his appointment. A copy of this order may be sent to Mr Saxena by the court Registry.