RAMESH KUMAR DWARKADAS MUNDADE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court for the purpose of challenging Clause 3(B)(8) as contained in Government Resolution No.CLA/2006/(299) KAMA-74 dated 25-4-2006, issued by the Government through Industries, Energy and Workers Department. According to petitioner, the said Clause is in conflict with the law applicable and also violative of fundamental rights. Reply is filed on behalf of respondents by Shri. Balraj Deshmukh, presently working as Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Latur, which is taken on record and considered.

(2.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by mutual consent. As is evident from the title of the Government Resolution. <IMG>judgement_1317_allmr(cri)_2009_nv1317(1)_ALLMR(CRI)_2009.jpg</IMG> i.e. "to free the State from unhealthy practice of child workers". It is evident that these are the directions/guidelines issued by the Government for the purpose of seeking freedom to the child workers wherever they are so employed. We need not refer to all the details in the Resolution. The Clause under challenge reads thus : <IMG>judgement_1317_allmr(cri)_2009_nv1317(2)_ALLMR(CRI)_2009.jpg</IMG> Freelance English translation of the same would be as under: "Because Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 defines Juvenile or child by its Section 2(k) as an individual who has not completed age of 18 years, if child workers who have completed 14 years are found in the raid, those child workers also should be freed from the clutches of the employer and they should be handed over to the police authorities." It appears that the directions/guidelines direct the authorities who are required to act upon those, to ensure freedom also to the child workers between the age group of 14 to 18 years.

(3.) The exception taken to the said Clause is based upon definition of "child" as contained in Section 2(ii) of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act 1986. The Preamble of the said Act reads as under: