The Supreme Court on Wednesday di💧rected the Centre for a legal fra꧋mework on the protection of the rights of domestic workers rights observing their exploitation and a "legal vacuum".
In the opinion of a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, for now, there seemed no effective legislative or executive action to enact a statute,𝓀 which could provide solace to millions of vulnerable domestic workers across the country.
"The simple reason for this harassment and rampant abuse, which seems to be prevalent throughout the country, is the legal vacuum which exists vis-à-vis the righ🐻ts and protection of domestic workers," the court said. Indeed, domestic workers in India remain largely unprotected and without any comprehensive legal recognition. As a result, they frequently endure low wages, unsafe environments, and extended hours without 𒁃effective recourse, it added.
The court directed the Ministry of Labour and Employment along with the Ministry of Sꦺocial Justice and Empowerment, the Ministry of Women and Child Development, and the Ministry of Law and Justice, to jointly constitute a committee comprising area experts for a legal framework meant for the benefit, protection and regulation of the rights of domestic workers.
The composition of ꦿthe expert committee, said th🌜e bench, was left to the wisdom of the Centre and its ministries concerned.
"It will be appreciated if the committee submits a report within a period of six months, whereupon the Government of India may consider th🦩e necessity of introducing a legal framework which may effectively address the cause and concern of domestic workers," it added.
Af𒐪ter the verdict was pronounced, Justice Surya Kant said the court planned to monitor the progress once the panel filed its report.
The top court passed the order while quashing a crim🦂inal case against former DRDO scientist Ajay Malik for the alleged wrongful confinement and traffick🏅ing of his domestic help.
It also🎉 upheld the quashing of a case against his neighbour Ashok Kumar.
In his plea filed through advocate Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Malik challenged the Uttarakhand High Court decision refusing to compound and quash the FIR🌞 despite the compla🥃inant's domestic help reportedly saying she was not wrongly confined or trafficked by the scientist, a senior citizen.
The bench said it was an incontrovertible fact that the demand for domestic workers was mounting in India, given the rapid urbanisa𝓡t💮ion and development.
"While any avenues for employment being opened to marginalised women merit celebration, we are at pains to note that despite their growing demand, this indispensable wo⭕rkforce has also been the most vulnerable to exploitation and abuse," it said.
In its opinion, domestic worke🐻rs often belonged to the marginalised communities, such as SC, ST, OBC, and EWS and were compelled to undertake domestic work due to financial hardship oꦓr displacement, further reinforcing their vulnerability.
For the bench, it was abundantly evident from the present appeals, the torture and exploitation oඣf the complainant for several years by individuals who forcibly trafficked her🧔 to differing cities, promising a better life that never materialised.
The purported placement agency which employed the complainant "continually leeched her salaries", leaving her utterly♕ destitute and helpless, it added.
The 👍bench referred to various international n🍒orms and standards on the issue.
Justice Surya Kant, who authored ve🐼rdict, said the court not only acknowledged the vulnerability of domestic workers but also strove to provide ⛄them extensive protection and parity with other labourers.
ꦬThe verdict pointed to a "degree of lacunae" in legislative frameworks, safeguarding and protecting the rights of domestic workers.
It said aside from the absence of any legislation protecting their interests, domestic wo﷽rkers were excluded from existing labour laws.
"These, inter alia, include statutes such as the Payment of Wages Act 1936, Equal Remuneration Act 1976, Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, etc," the court sa꧅id.
Given the lack of specific protection covering domestic workers in India, the court said it was a solemn duty and r🌌esponsibility to intervene, exercise the doctrine of parens patriae and forge the path leading to their proper welfare.
"In a catena of decisions, this court has repeatedly stepped in and laid down interim guidelines to protect vulnerable groups who we⛎re utterly unprotected due to legal gaps," it added.
That being said, the court found it appropriate to lay down an interim legal code to govern the working condit💙ions of domestic workers. It was cognisant of the fact that ordinarily, the judiciary should "not stray too far out of bounds" and expressly interfere in the legislative domain.
"The democratic setup of this country may be likened to a tripartite machine, fuelled by the doctrine of separation of powers, without whi💃ch it’s functioning shall surely come to a grinding halt," it added.
