MARIMUTHU Vs. INSPECTOR OF FACTORIES DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.S.Doraisamy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.A.Arumugam, learned Special Government Pleader taking notice for the respondent and perused the records.

(2.) IN all these cases, the petitioners were either proprietors of Powerloom Factories or partners of Powerloom Factories situate in Tharamangalam in Salem District. The grievance of the petitioners was that they received a legal notice from the respondent during November 1997 stating that they had employed child labour in violation of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 (for short Child Labour Act), when an inspection was made in respect of their establishment. The name of the child, the father's name and the age of the child was also mentioned in the notice issued to the petitioners. It was also brought to the notice of the petitioners the Judgment of the Supreme Court in M.C.Mehta vs State of Tamil nadu reported in AIR 1997 SC 699. IN that Judgment, the Supreme Court gave in paragraph 27 certain directions in the following lines:

(3.) IT is against this order, the petitioners have filed the present writ petitions and the writ petitions are admitted on 05.05.2004. Pending the writ petitions, this Court granted interim stay. But, however, directed the authorities to proceed further, if any of the petitioners had employed a child less than 14 years of age, after issuing the notice to the petitioner. Subsequently, these petitions came up before this Court on 03.02.2005 and since the petitioners have not complied with the defects pointed out by the Registry, they were given time to comply with the same. Since the defects were not complied with, on the same day, they were given two week's time to comply with the same, failing which the petitions would be dismissed automatically without any further reference to this Court.