Madras High Court directs State to consider plea to enact special legislation for protection of domestic workers in Tamil Nadu
Justice S. Srimathy directed the State government to consider the plea for special legislation for protection of domestic workers while hearing the petition filed by K. Seethalakshmi of Dindigul, a domestic worker.
The petitioner said that she has been working as a domestic worker for the past 30 years. It was widely accepted that domestic employment was a form of labour. Yet, domestic workers were rarely recognised as workers by their employers. Their work was largely unregulated. She said as per Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing (WIEGO) policy briefs in 2021, there were a total of 18 lakh domestic workers in Tamil Nadu.
She said the State needs to consider legitimising this profession promptly with special attention. There was no adequate legal framework available addressing issues regarding protection of domestic workers, work hours, wages or welfare. Unlike other labourers, domestic workers were excluded from the scope of all existing laws, she said.
There were laws to address the protection and welfare of labourers across various industries and many other Acts enacted for the welfare and safety of the labourers of each industry. But, for the protection and welfare of domestic workers, no exclusive Act was enacted, she said, adding that their work was not regulated putting them in the peripheral area of the protection of any law.
Hence, the enactment of a new legislation for the domestic workers is imperative at this juncture. The absence of an exclusive legislation will make this group of labourers more vulnerable. Domestic work is a distinctive category, which cannot be brought under other laws and requires meticulous attention, she said.
The State government should enact a new legislation to regulate domestic labourers and address issues regarding minimum wage, working hours, terms of employment, duties of employer, regulation of placement agencies, non-employment of child as domestic worker, protection and penalties for violations, welfare and other regulations to protect the domestic workers eventually ensuring social justice, she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
34 minutes ago
- NDTV
Court Dismisses Turkish Firm's Plea Against Revocation Of Security Clearance
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Thursday dismissed a plea by Turkish-based company Celebi Ground Handling India Private Limited against the Centre's decision to revoke its security clearance. "Dismissed," Justice Tejas Karia said, noting that similar pleas were quashed earlier. A different bench of the high court on July 7 dismissed pleas by Turkey-based firms -- Celebi Airport Services India Pvt Ltd and Celebi Delhi Cargo Terminal Management India Pvt Ltd -- challenging the revocation of their security clearance by aviation watchdog Bureau of Civil Aviation Safety (BCAS) on May 15, saying there are "compelling national security considerations" involved. BCAS revoked the security clearance days after Turkey backed Pakistan and condemned India's strikes on terror camps in the neighbouring country. During the argument, the company's advocate told the judge that the petition was filed on July 4 after a coordinate bench reserved its judgement in a similar case involving associated companies. The counsel said the July 7 verdict directly applied to the present case as well, and urged the judge to pass a similar order. The court on July 7 underlined the necessity to eliminate the possibility of espionage or dual use of logistics capabilities, which would be highly detrimental to the security of the country, especially in the event of an external conflict.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Delhi HC rejects Celebi plea against security clearance revocation
The Delhi High Court on Thursday rejected another petition by Turkish company Celebi Ground Handling India against the government's decision to revoke the security clearance for ground handling operations at the airports. Celebi Ground Handling's petition was identical to the issue raised by its related companies in other petitions, which was "squarely covered" in the July 7 order, Justice Tejas Karia said on Thursday. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Healthcare CXO Design Thinking MCA Technology healthcare others Data Analytics Product Management Public Policy Degree Project Management Management Operations Management Others PGDM Data Science Data Science Artificial Intelligence Cybersecurity Finance MBA Digital Marketing Leadership Skills you'll gain: Financial Analysis in Healthcare Financial Management & Investing Strategic Management in Healthcare Process Design & Analysis Duration: 12 Weeks Indian School of Business Certificate Program in Healthcare Management Starts on Jun 13, 2024 Get Details Similar petitions by related entities, Çelebi Airport Services India and Çelebi Delhi Cargo Terminal Management were earlier dismissed by another bench of Justice Sachin Datta on July 7. The court on July 7 said that there is 'no doubt, the principles of natural justice are sacrosanct; however, it is a compelling constitutional truth that security of the realm is the pre-condition for enjoyment of all other rights.' "The action taken is consistent with the judicially evolved principles, recognized across jurisdictions, which give primacy to legitimate national security considerations, even when weighed against the procedural due process,' it said. Emphasising that the law enforcement/intelligence agencies are in the best position to assess the demands of national security, the court said that 'once national security considerations are found to be in play, then, the court would not second guess the rationale/sufficiency of the action taken.' Citing various Supreme Court judgments, it said that the principles of natural justice may be excluded when national security concerns outweigh the duty of fairness and the State is best placed to decide how the interest of national security would be served. 'Ground handling services at airports offer deep access to airside operations, aircrafts, cargo, passenger information system and security zones. Such unbridled access to vital installations and infrastructure naturally elevates the need for strict security vetting for operators, and their foreign affiliations. This is particularly true in the wake of contemporary challenges faced by the country in the security domain, and the escalations/incidents witnessed in the recent past, with geopolitical factors at play,' the judgement stated. Celebi companies had moved the various courts after the government revoked the security clearance, citing national security concerns. They claimed that the revocation violated the principles of natural justice, as it was done without any prior show cause notice, hearing, or adequate justification for raising 'vague national security' concerns. Similar cases are still pending before the high courts of Bombay, Madras and Gujarat. The Director General of the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS) had on May 15 announced immediate cancellation of Celebi's security clearance, impacting the company's operations at nine Indian airports, including Delhi, Mumbai, and Bengaluru. The BCAS had also issued a directive to them to transfer their employees to third parties. The government's order had come in the wake of widespread boycott calls against Turkey after the country backed Pakistan during the military conflict between India and Pakistan, triggering a diplomatic fracas.
New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
Supreme Court to hear cases on Rohingya status, detention
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear cases related to Rohingyas as to whether they are refugees or illegal entrants, and whether they can be detained indefinitely in India. The apex court, which was hearing a batch of petitions on the deportation and living conditions of Rohingya refugees in the country, identified the main issues and decided to segregate them for adjudication later. A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, comprising Justice Surya Kant, Justice Dipankar Datta, and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh, while recording the submissions of the petitioners and others, observed that once the key issues are decided, other factors might be consequential. The Court segregated the cases for convenience and passed an order to hear the matter based on these issues. 'Are Rohingyas entitled to be declared as refugees, and if so, what protections or rights are they entitled to? If they are not refugees but illegal entrants, are the Union government's actions in deporting them justified? Even if they are held to be illegal entrants, can they be detained indefinitely, or are they entitled to be released on bail under conditions the Court deem fit to be imposed? Whether the Rohingyas who are not detained and living in refugee camps, have been provided basic amenities such as sanitation, drinking water, and education, etc. (in conformity with Article 21)?' The Court also said it would examine whether, if the Rohingyas are deemed illegal entrants, the Government of India and the States are obligated to deport them in accordance with the law. It, however, clarified that the issues that arose in Batch II will be dealt with separately by the Supreme Court. The apex court, however, did not fix any particular date to hear the issues.
