WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 110 OF 2006:
1.This writ petition has been filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner-People’s Rights and Social Research Centre, a Delhi-based non-governmental organization, seeking intervention of this Court in addressing the grave issue of “Silicosis” among workers in various industries across the country. The petitioner organization, registered under the Societies Registration Act since December 20, 1999, has been actively involved in occupational health work, specifically concerning stone crusher workers, stone quarry workers and construction workers.
2.Silicosis is an incurable occupational lung disease caused by prolonged inhalation of silica dust and it has been rampant throughout India due to inadequate detection, monitoring, and remedial measures. It predominantly affects workers engaged in industries such as mining, construction, stone cutting, and sandblasting, where they are exposed to high levels of silica dust. Over time, the inhaled silica particles cause inflammation and scarring of the lung tissue, leading to reduced lung function and severe respiratory distress. The disease manifests in three forms: chronic, accelerated, and acute silicosis, depending on the intensity and duration of exposure. Chronic silicosis, the most common form, develops over 10 to 30 years of low to moderate exposure, while accelerated and acute forms occur over shorter periods with higher exposure levels. The symptoms include shortness of breath, persistent cough, chest pain, and fatigue, often leading to severe disability and premature death. Despite its preventable nature through adequate safety measures, monitoring, and use of protective equipment, the lack of stringent enforcement and awareness has resulted in a significant number of workers contracting this debilitating disease. The petitioner underscores the urgent need for systemic reforms to address the detection, prevention, and treatment of silicosis to protect the health and rights of workers across the country.
3.The petitioner contends that the pervasive and unchecked prevalence of silicosis among workers in various industries constitutes a violation of the workers’ fundamental rights under the Constitution of India. Central to this petition is the assertion that the right to health, safety, and a life of dignity, enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution, is being grossly neglected. Furthermore, the Petitioner invokes the Directive Principles of State Policy, particularly Articles 39(e) and 42 of the Constitution of India which mandate the State to ensure that the health and strength of workers is not abused and that citizens are not forced by economic necessity to enter avocations unsuited to their age or strength. The petitioner argues that the State's failure to protect workers from hazardous conditions and provide adequate medical care, compensation, and rehabilitation is a direct infringement of these constitutional mandates. Additionally, the petitioner submits that the Right to a clean and healthy environment, as implicit under Article 48A, is being violated. The petitioner also references Article 43, which directs the State to ensure a living wage, conditions of work ensuring a decent standard of life, and full enjoyment of leisure and social and cultural opportunities for workers.
4.The Petitioner organization highlights the lack of sufficient insurance, treatment, compensation, and rehabilitation for victims and their families. The Petitioner has urged this Court to direct the constitution of a high-level committee to comprehensively address the detection and management of silicosis and other occupational diseases among workers, particularly in the unorganized sector. Furthermore, the Petitioner seeks guidelines for the prevention and treatment of such diseases, the rehabilitation of affected persons and families, compensation for the families of deceased workers, and alternative employment opportunities for the victims' family members. Summary of Proceedings thus far
5.This Writ Petition was filed in 2006. Since then,
various orders have been passed and it would be
necessary to go through them to understand the
current scenario pertaining to this writ petition. The
original Writ Petitioner had the following
Respondents: • The Union of India • Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs. • Ministry of Health and Family Welfare • The State of Haryana • The State of Rajasthan • The State of Gujarat • The State of Delhi • The Union of Territory of Puducherry.
5.1. On 27.03.2006, notice was issued to these
respondents. Given the human rights aspect of
this matter, the National Human Rights
Commission1, a statutory body constituted
under Protection of Human Rights (Amendment)
Act, 2006, was also made a party to these
proceedings constituted to ensure compensation
is reached to the families of the victims.
1 NHRC
5.2. On 25.07.2008, NHRC was permitted to
implead the Central Pollution Control Board2 as
a party.
5.3. On 5.3.2009, pursuant to court’s order,
the NHRC submitted its preliminary report on a
survey on silicosis affecting workers in various
industries which showed that the issue is
widespread across many states, and further
surveys were needed. The Ministry of Health and
Ministry of Labour, Union of India, were directed
to provide all necessary assistance to the NHRC
for further action regarding silicosis. The NHRC
was directed to address specific confirmed cases
of silicosis, recommending immediate medical
relief for sufferers and compensation for families
of those who died due to the said disease.
5.4. On 01.02.2010, the State of Madhya
Pradesh was also added as a respondent in this
matter.
5.5. On 12.11.2010, following an order of this
court dated 05.03.2009, the NHRC submitted a
detailed report highlighting the State of Gujarat's
failure to protect workers affected by Silicosis
2 CPCB
and recommending compensation to them. The
report observed that there was failure on the part
of the enforcement agencies in Gujarat to ensure
protection of the mine workers in Godhra and it
recommended an amount of Rs 3,00,000/- as
compensation to the next of kins of the 238
workers who had died due to Silicosis. Moreover,
the 304 workers which had come from the State
of Madhya Pradesh to work in Gujarat as mine
workers were directed to be given rehabilitation
packages by the relevant authorities of the State
of Madhya Pradesh.
5.6. On 18.2.2014, given the prevalence of the
issue in this matter, the Court impleaded the
remaining States as Respondents in this matter.
5.7. On 4.5.2016, the Court observed that the
directions issued in the report submitted by the
NHRC on 12.11.2010 were not followed by the
State of Gujarat. The Employees State Insurance
Corporation3 was impleaded as a party-
respondent through its Director General. The
State of Gujarat was directed to comply with
NHRC's recommendation by paying ₹1 lakh to
3 ESIC
the kins of each of the 238 deceased workers and
depositing remaining ₹2 lakhs in their names in
fixed deposits within one month. The Chief
Secretary of Gujarat was directed to transfer ₹3
lakhs per deceased worker to the District
Collectors of Jhabua and Alirajpur for
distribution. The distribution was to be handled
by the District Collectors, and assistance from
ESIC could be sought if needed. The State of
Madhya Pradesh was directed to file an affidavit
detailing the rehabilitation steps for the 304
affected individuals identified by NHRC. The
CPCB was also ordered to file an affidavit on
actions taken based on the Committee's report
on silicosis and pneumoconiosis in Godhra,
Gujarat.
5.8. On 23.8.2016, the Court reviewed the
affidavit filed by the District Collectors of the
affected regions in the State of Gujarat and
acknowledged their efforts in ensuring the
compensation was received by the next of kins of
the victims. The Court also reviewed the
Additional Affidavit filed by the CPCB and
observed that 16 out of 30 operational quartz
grinding units in Gujarat were non-compliant
with statutory mandates. The CPCB also made
recommendations for the State Pollution Control
Board4 to address deficiencies. The Court
directed the SPCB to file an affidavit within four
weeks on actions taken based on these
recommendations and on closing down 14 non-
operational units. It was further stated that if
non-compliant units intend to restart, they must
meet mandatory requirements. SPCB must
ensure compliance with mandatory pollution
prevention measures and take steps to close non-
compliant units. The CPCB also conducted an
inspection of the quartz grinding units in the
State of Gujarat and had made the following
recommendations:
“i. Adequate provision of dust extraction
systems shall be made at potential sources
such as jaw crusher hoppers, transfer points
of materials from conveyor belts,
disintegrators, transfer points of materials
from bucket elevators to other plant
equipment, rotary screens, magnetic
separators, vibratory screens, etc. The dust
extraction systems of such potential sources
shall be routed through an Air Pollution
Control Device (APCD). Stacks attached to
APCDs are to be equipped with adequate
4 SPCB
monitoring facilities as per CPCB Emission
Regulation, Part-III.
ii. The height of the stack shall be maintained
at a minimum of 2 meters above the roof level
as prescribed by the Board.
iii. Sheds provided for plant process
machineries shall be closed properly, and
provision of Closed Circuit Television (CCTV)
cameras shall be made rather than keeping
small openings in the shed for frequent
observations.
iv. The internal roads shall be made of
bitumen/concrete to reduce fugitive emissions
by vehicular movement, with proper cleaning
and wetting mechanisms.
v. Provision of a green belt shall be made
along the periphery of the individual units.
vi. Provision shall be made for systematic
water sprinkling at places of dust generation
to reduce fugitive emissions, and records of
water utilization shall be maintained.
vii. A telescopic chute or any other system
shall be adopted to reduce fugitive emissions
while loading the products into trucks or fine
dust in bags.
viii. Provision of Personal Protective
Equipment (dust masks, helmets, safety
shoes, goggles, earplugs) and utilization by all
workers during the operation of the plant shall
be ensured.
ix. The units shall ensure environmental
monitoring and submission of reports to GPCB
at regular intervals.
x. The housekeeping shall be improved.
xi. The units shall submit a time-bound action
plan to comply with the above measures
within 30 days.”
5.9. Hence, pursuant to the recommendation
of the CPCB, the Court directed the SPCB
Chairmen of Haryana, Rajasthan, Madhya
Pradesh, Puducherry, Jharkhand, and Delhi to
inspect quartz grinding units and report
deficiencies within three weeks. SPCB Chairmen
were directed to personally visit units’ post-
compliance period and take steps to close non-
compliant units.
5.10. The State of Madhya Pradesh had
identified 334 silicosis-affected individuals who
claimed rehabilitation actions. The District Legal
Services Authorities of Jhabua, Alirajpur, and
Dhar were directed to verify actual distribution of
benefits and submit a report within eight weeks.
They were to ensure that no silicosis-affected
individual was deprived of benefits. In case of
deceased victims, compensation was to be
processed as per policy.
5.11. The Court made further observation on the
general problems of silicosis in India and
observed that the severity of the problems is
mainly in the States of Delhi, Haryana,
Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat,
Jharkhand, and Puducherry. The NHRC had
conducted a detailed survey on this issue and
submitted a report to the duty holders
concerned. But the court noted that no
meaningful action has been taken either in any
of the prevention and rehabilitation areas. The
Court made further observations that vide order
dated 30th January 2008 in W.P.(C) No. 79 of
2005 titled 'Occupational Health & Safety
Association Versus Union of India & Ors.' this
Court had considered certain aspects on the
reduction of occupational hazards of the
employees of the Thermal Power Stations in the
country and had also issued the following
directions:
“i. Comprehensive medical check-up of all
workers in all coal-fired thermal power stations
by doctors appointed in consultation with the
trade unions. The first medical check-up is to
be completed within six months.
ii. Free and comprehensive medical treatment
to be provided to all workmen found to be
suffering from an occupational disease,
ailment, or accident until cured or until death.
iii. Services of the workmen not to be
terminated during illness and to be treated as
if on duty.
iv. Compensation to be paid to workmen
suffering from any occupational disease,
ailment, or accident in accordance with the
provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act
1923.
v. Modern protective equipment to be provided
to workmen as recommended by an expert
body in consultation with the trade unions.
vi. Strict control measures to be immediately
adopted for the control of dust, heat, noise,
vibration, and radiation to be recommended by
the National Institute of Occupational Health
(NIOH), Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
vii. All employers to abide by the Code of
Practice on Occupational Safety and Health
Audit as developed by the Bureau of Indian
Standards.
viii. Safe methods to be followed for the
handling, collection, and disposal of hazardous
waste to be recommended by NIOH.
ix. Appointment of a Committee of experts by
NIOH including representatives from trade
unions and Health and Safety NGOs to look
into the issue of Health and Safety of workers
and make recommendations.”
5.12. The Court noted that these directions
would be applicable to silica units as well. There
was a direction to the Chief Secretary of the
respective States to file an affidavit, after
convening a meeting of the duty holders
regarding the implementation of the various
reports, and to file an affidavit as to the action
taken in the respective states. The Court made it
clear that it was not concerned with any policy
framework of the State. The report was on the
benefits which have actually been made available
to the victims. The Court also directed the Chief
Secretary of the States concerned to submit a
detailed report as above within a period of two
months from today, failing which they will be
present before this Court at their own expense on
the next date of hearing. The court assigned
various specialists across the State of India to
constitute an enquiry and report to the court
with regard to the medical facilities available to
the patients affected by silicosis and whether any
compensation was made available to them, etc.
The required expenditure was to be borne by the
State concerned where the enquiry is being
conducted. On the legal framework, the learned
senior counsel appearing for the petitioners had
brought to the notice that the duty holders were
the Director General of Mines Safety (DGMS),
Ministry of Labour & Employment, Government
of India, and the Director General, Factory Advice
Service and Labour Institutes (DG-FASLI),
Government of India. The court directed the
above duty holders to submit a report on the
following aspects:
i. “The geographical location and the
industries/mines state-wise where workers at
risk of silicosis are to be found.
ii. The number of workers working at these
sites and the estimates of the number of
workers suffering from silicosis/
pneumoconiosis in the country, state-wise, and
industry/mine-wise.
iii. The details of the number of workers
suffering from silicosis/pneumoconiosis, their
medical treatment, and compensation paid.
iv. Details of the number of workers who died
due to silicosis during the last 10 years and the
compensation, if any, paid.”
5.13. Thereafter, the Court also directed the
Director General of Mines Safety5 and the
Director General, Factory Advice Service and
Labour Institutes (DG-FASLI) to carry out a
health and safety survey of silicosis-affected
workers under section 91A of the Factories Act
and section 9A of the Mines Act, by actively
involving, apart from government officials, non-
5 DGMS
government organizations working in silicosis-
affected areas, and submit a comprehensive
report to the Court as to the facilities available in
the field of treatment, actual payment of
compensation made available to the victims, and
other rehabilitation steps for the affected workers
and their family members. The Court directed the
Chief Secretary of each State to make all
arrangements for facilitating the survey and
preparation of the reports by the doctors
concerned in each State.
5.14. On 10.2.2017, the Court allowed the
impleadment application of Silicosis Peedit Sangh. 5.15. On 1.5.2017, the Court reiterated the
order dated 23.8.2016 regarding compensation
for those affected by and deceased from silicosis
to be implemented by all States. The NHRC was
permitted to file its recommendations. The CPCB
was directed to file an affidavit detailing whether
the recommendations in its report were being
followed by quartz and other silica dust-
producing industries.
5.16. On 05.03.2019, the Court reviewed the
report submitted by CPCB filed on 24.7.2017
after the inspection of polluting units which had
been functioning in the respondent-State.
According to them, a grim picture of large-scale
environmental law violations was taking place
which led to serious health problems and deaths
in affected areas.
5.17. Mr. Prashant Bhushan, counsel for the
Petitioner, suggested further steps needed to be
taken to ensure the closure of these polluting
units. The Respondent counsel indicated that
many units have been ordered to be closed, and
further action is being taken for the closure of
non-functional and still-operating units. It was
submitted that the respondents-States who
allowed such units to operate should be made to
pay adequate compensation to the victims. The
Union of India be also directed to submit their
response to the Reports submitted by the NHRC.
6.Having perused the various reports submitted by the respective State Committees, the NHRC, the CPCB, and the DGMS, the instant writ petition raises two primary aspects for consideration. For both these aspects, there are statutory bodies duly constituted. They would be in a better position to monitor and oversee that the mandate of law and the earlier directions issued by this Court are not only duly implemented but further necessary steps are also undertaken.
7.Firstly, the environmental aspect of the matter pertains to ensuring that industries abide by certain minimal standards to prevent silicosis among their workers. In the event of non-compliance, these industries should face closure. In our considered opinion, the National Green Tribunal6 is the appropriate authority to oversee this aspect of the matter. The NGT, established under the National Green Tribunal Act in 2010, is tasked with the expeditious disposal of cases related to environmental protection and the speedy implementation of decisions. Given that this writ petition was filed in 2006, prior to the establishment of the NGT, these matters could not have been presented before the Tribunal initially. However, we now direct the NGT to oversee the impact of silicosisprone industries and factories across India and ensure that the CPCB and the respective SPCBs comply with the earlier directions of this Court. Furthermore, we direct the NGT to undertake any 6 NGT additional necessary steps to prevent the spread of silicosis by such industries and factories.
8.The second aspect concerns ensuring that adequate compensation is received by the affected workers or their next of kins as swiftly as possible. In this regard, we direct the NHRC to oversee the compensation process across the respective states. We also direct the ESIC and the Chief Secretaries of the respective states to adhere to the directions of the NHRC and collaborate with them to ensure that the compensation distribution process is carried out efficiently and without delay.
9.We further direct the Registry of this Court to ensure that all the relevant reports and affidavits pertaining to this matter, as submitted by the respective State Committees, the CPCB, the NHRC, and the DGMS, are forwarded to the NGT and the NHRC to facilitate the execution of their responsibilities effectively and swiftly. Petitioners would also be at liberty to approach the NGT and NHRC and extend all cooperation in implementation of the directions.
10.The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. Transferred Case (C) No.8 of 2017
11.The Transferred Case (C) No.8 of 2017 is also disposed of in the same terms as above. (VIKRAM NATH) (PRASANNA BHALACHANDRA VARALE) NEW DELHI AUGUST 06, 2024