SHARIFF Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issue raised in both the writ petitions is common and identical, therefore, these writ petitions are heard together and decided by this common order. However, for the sake of convenience the facts of Writ Petition (M/S) 740 of 2008 are being referred in this order.

(2.) The petitioner has challenged the order of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, District Haridwar, who has imposed a penalty of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) against the petitioner under the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 (from hereinafter referred to as the "Act"?).

(3.) It is alleged that "gudcharkhi"? which is a crusher where sugarcane is crushed to make "jaggery"?, the petitioner had employed a child labour and on being inspected by the concerned authority under the Act, a report was given to the Assistant Labour Commissioner, District Haridwar who has imposed a penalty of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) upon the petitioner.