IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29/03/2006
C O R A M
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.A.K.SAMPATH KUMAR
H.C.P.NO.277 of 2006
A.Kannaiyan .. Petitioner
-Vs-
1. State of Tamil Nadu rep.by its
Secretary, Adi-Dravidar Welfare
Department, Fort St.George,
Chennai-600 009.
2. The Director General of Police,
Mylapore, Chennai-600 004.
3. The District Collector,
Perambalur & District.
4. The Superintendent of Police,
Perambalur & District.
5. The Inspector of Police,
Sendurai Police Station,
Perambalur District.
6. The District Collector,
Ernakulam District,
Kerala State.
7. P.P.Shippu
8. Govindarajan .. Respondents
Prayer:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for the issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus to direct, ( a) the
respondents to produce the body and person of the persons listed in the
Annexure to the petition who are held as bonded labourers now under the
illegal custody of respondents 7 and 8 and set them at liberty; (b)
respondents 1 and 3 to take all necessary measures forthwith to provide
rehabilitation to the persons listed in the Annexure to the petition who are
held as bonded labourers in the light of the Bonded Labour Abolition Act, 1976
and the rules made thereunder and to pass such further orders.
!For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sathia Chandran
^For Respondents : Mr.Abudukumar Rajarathinam
Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for
Respondents 1 to 5
:O R D E R
(ORDER OF THE COURT WAS MADE BY P.SATHASIVAM, J.)
The petitioner, by name, A.Kannaiyan has filed this petition seeking
for a direction to the respondents to produce all the 18 persons mentioned in
the Annexure to the said petition, who, according to him, are held as bonded
labourers, now under the illegal custody of respondents 7 and 8 and set them
at liberty. The petitioner has also sought for a further direction to
respondents 1 and 3 to take all necessary measures forthwith to provide
rehabilitation to the persons listed in the Annexure, who are held as bonded
labourers, in the light of the Bonded Labour Abolition Act, 1976 and the rules
made thereunder.
2. Pursuant to the direction of this Court, all the 18 persons listed
in the Annexure, appeared before us. We enquired each one of them. Among the
said 18 persons, three are minor and others are major. During the enquiry,
they reported that they all belong to Nathakuzhi Colony, Manapattur Panchayat,
Sendhurai Taluk, Perambalur District. According to them, on the advice of the
eighth respondent, who is also the present before us, they went to Nedunallur
Village of Ernakulam District, Kerala. They further informed this Court that
each of them was promised to pay Rs.100/- per day. It is further seen from
their statement that they went to the said place a month ago and they were
getting an amount from respondents 7 and 8 every week for food. Except one
Sivakumar, Son of Thambusamy, other 17 persons are not interested in
continuing their job there and they want to come back to their native village.
They also requested for settlement of their one month wages by respondents 7
and 8. They also prayed that the same may be directed to be paid to them.
3. Though the petitioner has filed this petition alleging that the
persons mentioned in the Annexure were taken to Kerala as bonded labourers,
our enquiry of all the 18 persons shows that due to unemployment in their
village and on the assurance of the eighth respondent that they will be paid
wages at the rate of Rs.100/- to Rs.120/- per day, they went to Kerala. They
also informed us that all of them were paid Rs.250/- towards transport
charges. On our enquiry of all the 18 persons as well as the eighth
respondent and the statement of the learned Government Advocate, we are
satisfied that all these persons were not taken as bonded labourers and were
also not treated so. However, it is clear that due to unemployment in the
area in which all of them are residing and in order to eke out their
livelihood and on the assurance that they will be paid decent wages, they left
their native place and went to the place of the seventh respondent.
4. In view of their willingness to go back to their native place at
Perambalur District, they are permitted to go to their native place. Learned
Government Advocate has assured that their journey from Chennai to their
native place will be taken care of by the official respondents. Considering
the grievance expressed by the 18 persons mentioned in the Annexure, it is
made clear that if they make any representation to the District Collector,
Perambalur District regarding their poverty, unemployment, etc. the Collector
is directed to consider the same, and if suitable employment is available
within his jurisdiction, the request of those persons may be considered
sympathetically. The eighth respondent is directed to collect wages for the
period of one month in respect of those 18 persons mentioned in the Annexure
from the seventh respondent and pay the same to them within a period of one
month from today. Further direction is also issued to respondents 3 and 5 to
monitor and see that the arrears of wages being settled to all the 18 persons
by respondents 7 and 8.
5. With the above observation/direction, the habeas corpus petition
is disposed of.
To
1. State of Tamil Nadu rep.by its
Secretary, Adi-Dravidar Welfare
Department, Fort St.George,
Chennai-600 009.
2. The Director General of Police,
Mylapore, Chennai-600 004.
3. The District Collector,
Perambalur & District.
4. The Superintendent of Police,
Perambalur & District.
5. The Inspector of Police,
Sendurai Police Station,
Perambalur District.
6. The District Collector,
Ernakulam District,
Kerala State.