NEW DELHI, Jan 29: On Wednesday, the Supreme Court instructed the Centre to develop a legal framework to protect domestic workers from exploitation, highlighting the current “legal vacuum” surrounding their rights.
A bench composed of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan expressed concerns that there appears to be no effective legislative or executive efforts to create a statute that would provide relief to millions of vulnerable domestic workers across India.
“The prevalent harassment and widespread abuse is fundamentally attributed to the legal vacuum regarding domestic workers’ rights and protections,” the court stated. Domestic workers in India largely lack comprehensive legal recognition, leading to issues such as low wages, unsafe working conditions, and extended hours without proper recourse, it noted.
The court mandated that the Ministry of Labour and Employment, alongside the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, the Ministry of Women and Child Development, and the Ministry of Law and Justice, collaborate to form a committee of experts to establish a legal framework for the benefit and regulation of domestic workers’ rights.
The composition of the expert committee was left to the discretion of the relevant ministries, as mentioned by the bench.
“The committee is requested to submit a report within six months, after which the Government of India may evaluate the need to introduce a legal framework to effectively address the concerns of domestic workers,” the court added.
Following the verdict, Justice Surya Kant mentioned that the court intends to monitor progress once the committee submits its findings.
The Supreme Court issued this order while overturning a criminal case against former DRDO scientist Ajay Malik related to the alleged wrongful confinement and trafficking of his domestic helper.
The court also upheld the dismissal of a case against his neighbor, Ashok Kumar.
Malik, represented by advocate Rajeev Kumar Dubey, challenged the Uttarakhand High Court’s decision, which had refused to dismiss the FIR even though the complainant’s domestic worker reportedly stated she was neither confined nor trafficked by the senior citizen scientist.
The bench noted that there is a clear increase in the demand for domestic workers in India, given the rapid pace of urbanization and development.
“While the expansion of employment opportunities for marginalized women is commendable, it is concerning that despite their rising demand, this crucial workforce is particularly susceptible to exploitation and abuse,” the court observed.
It noted that many domestic workers belong to marginalized communities such as SC, ST, OBC, and EWS, and are often compelled to take up domestic work due to financial challenges or displacement, thus heightening their vulnerability.
The bench found evidence of the complaint’s prolonged suffering and exploitation by individuals who trafficked her to various locations under false promises of a better life.
The so-called placement agency that hired the complainant continuously deducted her wages, leaving her destitute and helpless, it further stated.
The bench referenced various international norms and standards regarding this issue.
Justice Surya Kant, who authored the verdict, emphasized that the court not only recognized domestic workers’ vulnerability but also sought to provide them with adequate protection and parity with other laborers.
The ruling highlighted significant “gaps” in existing legislative protections for domestic workers’ rights.
It underscored that domestic workers are excluded from current labor laws, including the Payment of Wages Act 1936, Equal Remuneration Act 1976, and others.
With the absence of specific protections for domestic workers in India, the court asserted that it was its solemn duty to intervene and exercise the doctrine of parens patriae to ensure their welfare.
“In numerous decisions, this court has intervened and set interim guidelines to safeguard vulnerable groups that are unprotected due to legal gaps,” it added.
Despite acknowledging that the judiciary typically should not interfere in legislative domains, the court deemed it necessary to establish an interim legal code governing the working conditions of domestic workers.
“The democratic structure of this nation functions as a tripartite machine, driven by the principle of separation of powers; without this, it would not operate effectively,” it concluded. (Agencies)
