State Duty-Bound To Ensure Well-being, Life And Liberty Of Migrant Workers Also: Kerala HC
State Duty-Bound to Ensure Well-Being, Life, and Liberty of Migrant Workers: Kerala High Court
Background
Migrant workers form an essential part of the workforce in many Indian states, including Kerala.
Despite their contribution, migrant workers often face precarious living conditions, lack of social security, poor access to healthcare, and vulnerability during emergencies (e.g., pandemics, natural calamities).
The Constitution of India guarantees fundamental rights to life and personal liberty (Article 21), which applies to every person within the territory of India, irrespective of their place of origin or employment status.
Courts have recognized that the State has a constitutional obligation to protect and promote the welfare of migrant workers.
Kerala High Court’s Stand
Key Observations
The Kerala High Court has repeatedly held that migrant workers are entitled to the same protection of life and liberty as any other citizen.
The State is responsible for:
Providing adequate shelter, food, and healthcare.
Ensuring safe working conditions and fair wages.
Protecting migrant workers from exploitation and abuse.
Facilitating access to relief during emergencies, including transportation and quarantine measures.
The Court emphasized that the dignity of migrant workers must be preserved, and their fundamental rights safeguarded.
Case: Suo Motu W.P. (C) No. 2 of 2020
In response to COVID-19 lockdown challenges, Kerala HC suo motu addressed the plight of migrant workers.
Directed the State government to:
Set up relief camps with adequate facilities.
Ensure timely distribution of food and essential supplies.
Provide medical care and information.
Coordinate safe transport back to native places for those wishing to return.
Highlighted that migrant workers are not mere "outsiders" but residents entitled to constitutional protection.
Stressed that State’s failure to protect migrant workers amounts to violation of their fundamental rights.
Supporting Supreme Court Judgments
1. Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation, (2014) 1 SCC 1
Although primarily about LGBTQ rights, the Court underscored the State’s role in protecting vulnerable and marginalized groups, which by analogy includes migrant workers.
2. Chameli Singh v. State of UP, AIR 1996 SC 1059
Affirmed that the right to life under Article 21 includes protection of health and adequate livelihood, applicable to all persons.
3. Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 802
The Supreme Court recognized the State’s responsibility to protect workers from exploitation and safeguard their living conditions, emphasizing the right to life includes dignity and humane conditions.
Constitutional and Legal Basis
| Provision | Significance |
|---|---|
| Article 21 (Right to Life) | Guarantees protection of life and personal liberty to all persons within India |
| Directive Principles (Article 39) | State should ensure humane conditions of work and livelihood |
| Labour Laws & Social Security | Various statutes protect workers’ rights and welfare |
Practical Implications
| Aspect | State Obligations |
|---|---|
| Shelter and Food | Provide relief camps and food during emergencies |
| Healthcare | Ensure medical facilities and information dissemination |
| Safety and Fair Wages | Enforce labour laws protecting migrant workers |
| Transportation | Facilitate safe return or relocation when needed |
| Protection from Exploitation | Take action against abuses and ensure legal safeguards |
Conclusion
The Kerala High Court has firmly upheld that the State is constitutionally duty-bound to protect the well-being, life, and liberty of migrant workers. Their fundamental rights are inviolable and must be respected regardless of their origin or employment status. The State’s proactive role in ensuring humane living and working conditions reflects the spirit of constitutional justice and social welfare.
RELATED Blog
0 comments