NATIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE FOR CENTRAL LEGISLATION ON CONSTRUCTION LABOURversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

                    (2011] 3 S.C.R. 889


   NATIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE FOR CENTRAL                    A
      LEGISLATION ON CONSTRUCTION LABOUR
                             v.
                UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
         Contempt Petition Nos. 42 & 43 of 2011
                             IN                               B
           Writ Petition (Civil) No. 318 of 2006
                     MARCH 15, 2011
   [S.H. KAPADIA, CJ!., K.5. RADHAKRISHNAN AND
             SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.]                           .C

      Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 32 - Writ petition
under - Seeking implementation of the Building and Other
Construction Workers (Regulations of Employment and
Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 and Building and Other o
Construction Workers' Welfare Gess Act, 1996; and seeking
directions to establish the Welfare Boards, collect cess,
complete the registration and grant benefits to the
beneficiaries - Also prayer made that the· rules and
regulations relating to the health, safety and welfare of the E
workers, mainly fhP workers engaged in construction activity
should be framed and safety equipments be provided -
Union of India and all 36 States/Union Territories impleaded
as party-respondents to the petition - Issuance of various
orders and directions by the Court requiring the respective F
States to implement the provisions of the Act - Status
reports and affidavits filed on behalf of the respondents
showing non-compliance of the statutory duty and functions
by th(! appropriate Governments as also non-implementation
of the provision of the Act in their entirety - Contempt
petition filed by the petitioner alleging that the respondents G
have disobeyed the orders of Supreme Court for a long
period, despite directions of the Supreme Court - In the
circumstances, Supreme Court issuing notice to show cause

                            889                               H
    890        SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2011) 3 S.C.R.

A why proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 be
  not initiated against the respondents in Contempt Petitions
  - Also issuing directions to the officers of the respective/
  appropriate Governments to be present in the Court on the
  next date of hearing - Building and Other Construction
B Workers (Regulations of Employment and Conditions of
  Service) Act, 1996 - Building and Other Construction
  Workers' Welfare Gess Act, 1996 - Contempt of Courts Act,
  1971.                     '

C      CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Contempt Petition Nos.
    42&43of2011.

          IN

          Writ Petition (Civil) No. 318 of 2006
D
          Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

                                 WITH
    I.A. No. 6 of 2001 in W.P. (C) No. 318 of 2006.
E
      Vivek K. Tankha, ASG, Colin Gonsalves, P.P. Malhotra,
  A. Mariarputham, AG, Dr. Manish Singhvi, Manjit Singh,
  Jayshree Anand, AAG, Tariq Abeed, Jyoti Mendiratta, Riku
  Sharma, Navnit Kaur (for Corporate Law Group), Arun K.
  Sinha, Sunita Sharma, Manpreet Singh Doabia, S.S. Rawat,
F S.W.A. Qadri, Saima Bakshi, Gargi Khanna, Shailendra Saini,
  A. Deb Kumar, D.S. Mahra, Anil Katiyar, S.N. Terdal, Nandini
  Gore, Gopal Singh, Rituraj Biswas, Manish Kumar, B.S.
  Banthia, Naveen Sharma, Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, T.V. George,
  Radha Shyam Jena, Ranjan Mukherjee, 0. Bharathi Reddy,
G Sanjay V. Kharde, Asha Gopalan Nair, Pragyan P. Sharma,
  P.V. Yogeswaran, Hemantika Wahi, Nupur Kanungo, Anil
  Shrivastav, Rituraj Biswas, Khwairakpam Nobin Singh,
  Sapam Biswajit Meitei, Aruna Mathur, Yusuf Khan, Avneesh
  Arputham, Megha Gour (Arputham, Aruna & Co.), Naresh K.
H
      NATIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITIEE FOR CENTRAL               891
    LEGISLATION ON CONST. LABOUR v. UNION OF INDIA

 Sharma, Radha Rangaswamy, Anil K. Jha, Chhaya Kumari,             A
 Anis Suhrawardy, Tara Chandra Sharma, Neelam Sharma
 Kamini Jaiswal, T. Harish Kumar, Devanshu Kumar Devesh,
 Milind Kumar, Balaji Srinivasan, Sanjay R. Hegde, A.
 Subhashini, Atul Jha, D.K. Sinha, J. K. Bhatia, Savitri Pandey,
 Shrish Kumar Misra, V.G. Pragasam, S. J. Aristotle, Prabu         B
 Rama Subramanian, Edward Belho, K. Enatoli Serna, Sunil
 Fernandes, Renu Gupta, Sidhan Geol, Vivekta Singh, Kamal
·Mohan Gupta, G.N. Reddy, \/. Pattabhi Ram Vadrevu, R.
 Satish, S. Geetha, Ajay Pal, D. Mahesh Babu, Ramesh Allanki
 for the appearing parties.                                        c
     The following Order of the Court was delivered

                          ORDER
    By this common order, we shall deal with IA No.6 in WP         o
No.318 of 2006 and Contempt Petition Nos.41 and 42 of
2011.

      In this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India
the petitioner inter a/ia prayed for issuance of a writ of
mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction directing E
the respondents to forthwith implement the Building and Other ·
Construction Workers (Regulations of Employment and
Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as
'the Act') and The Building and Other Construction Workers'
Welfare Cess Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Cess F
Act') in their entirety and, in particular, to establish the Welfare
Boards, collect cess, complete the registration and grant
benefits to the beneficiaries with immediate effect as per the
provisions of the respective Acts. Further, it is also prayed that
the rules and regulations relating to the health, safety and G
welfare of the workers, particularly the workers in relation to
building and construction activity, should be framed and safety
equipments including safety harness and safety nets should
be provided to them at. the place of work. The petitioner has
impleaded the Union of India and all the 36 States/Union H
    892      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                 [2011] 3 S.C.R.


A   Territories as party-respondents to the present petition.

          This Court, vide its order dated 28th July, 2006 issued
    notice to all the respondents. Some of the States and the
    Union of India had filed their replies and after hearing the
8   learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Court passed
    various directions as recorded in different orders of the Court
    from time to time and the respondents were required to
    comply with these directions. Vide order dated 12th May,
    2008, a direction was issued by this Court to the Secretary
C   of the Labour Department of each State requiring them to
    submit a detailed status report within eight weeks as to what
    steps have been taken by them to implement the provisions
    of the aforesaid two Acts. Some of the States had submitted
    their reports and it was evident from the content of those
    reportsfaffidavits that the provisions of both the Acts have not
D   been substantially complied with. This resulted in passing of
    detailed order by this Court dated 13th January, 2009. In this
    order the Court noticed that under Section 6 of the Act, the
    appropriate Government has to appoint Registration Officers
    and under Section 7 of the Act every employer was to register
E   their establishment with the said Officer. Reference was also
    made to the obligation on the part of the State to constitute
    the State Welfare Boards under the provisions of Section 18
    the Act. After noticing that the petitioner had filed a chart
     indicating the steps taken by various Governments, it was
F   evident that many of the Governments had not even taken
    steps as per provisions of the Act. The Court, thus, directed
    as under: -

          "We direct the Chief Secretary of the respective States
G         and Secretary (Labour) of each States and the Union
          Territories to take timely steps as per the provisions of
          the Act, if not already done. We would like to have the
          appraisal report in the first week of May as to what steps
          have been taken in this regard. If any of the State
          Government has not done anything pursuant to the Act,
H
     NATIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITIEE FOR CENTRAL               893
   LEGISLATION ON CONST. LABOUR v. UNION OF INDIA

    urgent steps are to be taken so that the benefits of. this   A
    legislation shall not go waste. Otherwise the unorganized
    workers of the construction sector will be denied the
    benefit of the Act."

      The Court thereafter passed various orders and B
directions requiring respective States to implement the ·
provisions of the Act. Vide order dated 18th January, 2010,
the Court noticed the object of the Act as well as made
reference to various provisions of the Act and issued 11
directions. These directions relate to the constitution of the C
State Welfare Boards by the respective States, holding of
meetings by the said Boards at regular intervals to discharge
their statutory duties, creating awareness about the benefits
of the Act amongst the beneficiaries through media,
appointment of Registering Officers and setting up centres in
each district for that purpose. This Court further directed that D
all contracts with Government shall require registration of
workers under the Act to give benefits of the Act to the
registered persons, the CAG to conduct audit of the entire
implementation of the Act and use of the allocated funds and
finally the. Boards to prepare detailed reports in regard to the E
implementation.

     Despite passing of these clear orders by the Court, the
provisions of the Act have not been implemented in their
entirety. Further, noticing the persisting default, the Court F
passed an order dated 10th September, 201 O referring to
various provisions of the Act as well as the fact that the
Central Government has not even issued any directions•under
Section 60 of the Act, despite the Court's order dated 18th
January, 2010, Noticing the incidences in that regard the Court G
directed the Central Government to issue appropriate
directl':''1s to the States as well as furnish the status report of
Central Aavisory Committee as to what steps had been taken
by them with regard to implementation of the provisions of the
respective Acts. On subsequent dates, the petitioner H
    894     SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2011] 3 S.C.R.


A   submitted that the directions of the Court as well as the
    provisions of the Act were not being implemented by various
    States. The Court, thus, granted liberty to the petitioner, vide
    its order dated 22nd November, 2010, to take out contempt
    motion State-wise.
B
       The petitioner filed IA No. 6 of 2011 on 5th January, 2011
  primarily praying for filing of additional documents. In the
  documents annexed to this application there were charts
  giving details of the States which had not constituted the
C Welfare Boards, information about constitution of the Cess
  Collecting Authority, number of workers registered with each
  State and the Schemes framed and implemented. From the
  charts, it was obvious that most of the States had defau::::id
  in complying with the provisions of the Act and some of them,
  in fact, had not even constituted the State Welfare Bo~rd3
D despite the writ petition being pending in this Court since the
  year 2006 and the Court having issued various directions in
  that regard. The petitioner then filed Contempt Petition Nos.
  42 of 2011 and 43 of 2011.

E      In Contempt Petition No. 42 of 2011, the petitioner has
  averred that Respondent Nos.2 to 10 have failed to take even
  the preliminary steps to constitute the Welfare Boards under
  Section 18 of the Act and that the Central Government has
  neither issued any directions nor taken any steps in that
F behalf. The defaulters, in this regard, are stated to be the
  Union Territories of Lakshadweep, Government of the State
  of Meghalaya, Government of the State of Nagaland and the
  Union of India. The Labour Secretary of the respective States
  and the Director General of Inspection of the Government of
G India have been impleaded as respondents in this petition.

        Contempt Petition No. 43 of 2011 has been filed
    primarily on the ground that the respondents in that petition
    had willfully disobeyed the orders of this Court, particularly the
    order dated 18th January, 2010 and they have not
H
      NATIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE FOR CENTRAL                895
    LEGISLATION ON CONST. LABOUR v. UNION OFINDIA

implemented the provisions of the Act. The Registering A
Officers have not· been appointed and the workers are not
being registered, resulting in. non-implementation of the
schemes for grant of benefits and the facilities to such
workers. Defaulters in this regard are the States of
Maharashtra, Goa, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, B
Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Manipur and the Union Territories
of Daman & Diu, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Chandigarh,
Andaman & Nicobar Island. Their Labour Secretaries, Chief
Inspector of Inspection and Administrators have been
impleaded as respondents in this petition along with the c
Director General of Inspection, Government of India .

     . Having referred to the facts on record and the orders of
 this Court passed from time to time, we may now refer to
 some of the provisions of both the statutes which impose a
 statutory obligation upon the respondents to carry out their        D
·functions and duties in accordance with those provisions and
 the directions issued by this Court. Every State is required to
 constitute a State Welfare Board in accordance with the
 provisions of Section 18 of the Act which Board, upon its
 constitution, is required to discharge its functions under          E
 Section 22 of the Act. Some of the defined functions are to
 provide immediate assistance to the beneficiaries, sanction
 loans, give financial assistance for education of children and
 even make payment of maternity benefits to the female
 beneficiaries. The appropriate Government is further required       F
 to appoint Registering officers in terms of Section 6 of the Act
 and the establishments are required to be registered with that
 officer as per the provisions of Section 7. The beneficiaries/
 workers are to be registered with the officer authorized by the
 Boarr1 in that behalf in accordance with the provisions of          G
 Section ~ 2 of the Act. The beneficiaries are required to make
 their respecd·'~ contributions in terms of Section 16 of the Act.
 The consequences of default both of the beneficiary and the
 establishment are provided under the statute itself and
 accordingly appropriate steps are to be taken by the                H
    896      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2011] 3 S.C.R.


A   Registering Authority and the appropriate Government, as the
    case may be.

       There shall be levy and collection of cess at the rate of
  and in the manner specified under Section 3 of the Cess Act
8 and every employer has to furnish returns in accordance with
  Section 4 of that Act. After its assessment in accordance with
  law, the cess is to be paid and collected. The default in
  payment thereof bears the penal consequences as well as
  interest has to be paid on delayed payment of cess. Offences
C committed by the company and other defaulters are
  punishable under the provisions of the Cess Act.

         From the various status reports and the affidavits filed on
   behalf of the respondents, it is clear that the appropriate
   Governments have, admittedly, not complied with their
D statutory duties and functions. All the application/!Jt:aitions,
   subject matter of the present order, are supported by affidavit
   filed by the co-ordinator of the petitioner organization. Number
   of States, particularly Union Territory of Lakshadweep and
   States of Meghalaya and Nagaland have not even constituted
E the Welfare Boards in terms of Section 18 of the Act. The
   State of Uttar Pradesh has completed the formality of
   constituting a Board but it is a one man Board instead of
   having a minimum of three or more members as required
   under Section 18 of the Act. The charts submitted by the
F petitioner further show that no worker has been registered by
 . the States of Assam, Mizoram, Sikkim and Jammu and
   Kashmir. The appropriate Governments and Registering
   Authorities, wherever constituted, particularly the respondent
   State Governments in these application/petitions have failed
G to either collect the requisite cess amount or have collected
   the same inadequately and in any case have failed to
   distribute the benefits and facilities to the beneficiaries. In this
   manner and for a considerable period, the respondents in
   these application/petitions have, on the one hand disobeyed
H the orders of this Court particularly orders dated 18.01.2010,
     NATIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITIEE FOR CENTRAL                 897
   LEGISLATION ON CONST. LABOUR v. UNION OF INDIA

13.08.2010 and 10.09.2010, while on the other they have              A
failed to perform their statutory obligations under the provisions
of the Act despite directions of this Court.
Default on the part of these respondents, thus, has persisted
over a long period and the Court· is left with no alternative
except to pass appropriate .directions/orders in accordance          B
with law on these two contempt petitions. In the Circumstances
afore-referre..;, ·.ve hereby issue notice to show cause why
proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 be not
initiated against all the respondents in Contempt Petition
Nos.42 and 43 of 2011. Further we are also compelled to              c
direct the following officers of 'the respective/appropriate
Governments to be present in the Court on the next date of
hearing :
      1.    The Labour Secretary,
            Ministry of Labour,                                      D
            Sharam Shakti Bhavan,
            Rafi Marg, New Delhi.
      2.    The Labour Secretary Lakshadweep,
                                                                     E
            U.T. of Lakshadweep,
            Karvarthi - 682 555.
      3.    The Labour Secretary, Meghalaya,
            Government of Meghalaya,
                                                                     F
            Department of Labour.
            Rilang Building,
            Shillong - 793 001.
      4.    The Labour Secretary, Nagaland,                          G
            Government of Nagaland,
            Department of Labour.
            Civil Secretariat,
            Kohima - 797 001.                                        H
    898         SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2011) 3 S.C.R.

A          5.     Director General of Inspection,
                  .Government of India,
                  Mansingh Road,
                  New Delhi - 110 011.
B
         With the above orders, we direct these application/
    petitions to be listed after four weeks. Notice to all the
    respondents returnable on the same date.

    N.J.                                            Matters pending.