Top News Headlines 21st Dec 2021: Illegal And Unconstitutional: Kerala HC Calls For Ban On Nokkukooli

Illegal And Unconstitutional: Kerala HC Calls For Ban On Nokkukooli

• Nokkukooli, also known as ‘gawking wages’ or ‘wages for just looking on’ is a widely recognised malpractice which is bringing a bad name to the state of Kerala. It is a mode of extortion in which labour unions demand money for letting any employer unload his goods using his own labour or machines.
• The way this system works is that the Labour Unions generally post members as lookouts who, after spotting a quarry, spread the news to all the available union members who descend upon the unloading site and demand exorbitant rates for doing the work which is not accompanied by efficiency for which they demanded the money to begin with. What follows is a compromise, by which the employer essentially pays two groups- one for actually doing the job and the other being the Labour Union workforce, just for looking on.
• In the present case of T.K.Sundaresan vs. District Police Chief, the Hon’ble Kerala HC observed that “It is unclear how this practice is spreading it’s tentacles in our small State, but it is common, admitted knowledge that it is being widely practiced in the State, as if it is an entitlement amongst trade unions. It is an unintended by-product of a well intended legislation”.
• A plea was filed in the Hon’ble HC by a man who was not provided with the necessary workerforce in pursuance to a dispute between him and the union over nokkukooli.
• The Court delved into the history of the Kerala Headload Workers Act, 1978, saying that the purpose of this legislation was to safeguard the interests of labourers, but has now been turned into a medium of extortion by the Labour Unions.
• It was suggested by the Court that the practice of manual labour has to be modernised by way of mechanical assistance so that massive bodily trauma to the labourers could be avoided.
• The directions issued by the Court were as follows-

1. Demand of nokkukooli in any form or manner is unconstitutional.
2. If any complaint is made with regard to any demand to nokkukooli, the same has to be registered under the appropriate sections of the IPC including extortion, among others.
3. The Government should carry out the amendment suggested by the Court to regulate the industry.
4. The Welfare Board and the Government need to devise methods to modernize the Act.

And now, a question for our judicial aspirants-

In which case has the Supreme Court held that the right to work is a Fundamental Right ?

Lok Sabha Passes The Election Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2021 Amidst Roar From The Opposition

• The Lok Sabha on Monday passed the controversial Election Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2021 to finally give way to various reforms including the linking of Aadhaar Card with Voter-Id.
• The Opposition vehemently opposed the passing of the Bill, with many leaders claiming that it was beyond the legislative competence of the House and stands in complete violation of the Right to Privacy judgement of the Hon’ble SC (K.S.Puttaswamy vs. Union of India, 2018). It was also demanded that the Bill should be referred to the standing committee for further deliberation.
• The Statement of Object and Reasons of the Bill states that the Bill seeks to amend section 23 of the Representation of The People Act, so that the Aadhaar System can be linked to the electoral data. This would help curb the multiple enrollments of the same person in different areas.
• The Electoral Registration Officers would be allowed to ask aadhaar numbers from persons already registered as voters for the purpose of establishing their identities. This will curb the menace of multiple registrations in different constituencies of the same person.
• The Amendment, at the same time, makes it clear that “no application for inclusion of name in the electoral roll shall be denied and no entries in the electoral roll shall be deleted for the inability of an individual to furnish or intimate Aadhaar number due to suc insufficient cause as may be prescribed”.
• As of now, the only qualifying date for being registered as a voter is January 1. After the amendment, January 1, April 1, July 1 and October 1 shall be the qualifying dates for the revision of electoral rolls.
• In addition to this, an amendment to section 20 and section 60 of the Representation of The People Act will make the elections gender-neutral for service voters.
• People who are unable to furnish their aadhaar cards will be allowed to submit other documents in proof of their identity.

And now, a question for our aspirants-

When did the Representation of The People Act come into force?

Marital Status Of The Daughter Not A Ground For Denial In Case Of Compassionate Appointment- SC Upholds Karnataka HC Verdict

• The Hon’ble SC, while upholding the decision of the Karnataka HC said that it fully concurs with the rationale given by the HC.
• A bench of Justices Kaul and Sundresh was hearing an SLP filed by the State of Karnataka against the against the decision of the Karnataka HC in which the HC confirmed the order of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal in which it directed that the appointment of the respondent on compassionate grounds should be considered, if she is eligible otherwise.
• In December, 2020, the Karnataka HC in the case of Bhuvanehswari V. Purani vs. State of Karnataka had observed the following-
• “If the marital status of a son does not make any difference in law to his entitlement to seek appointment on compassionate grounds, the marital status of the daughter should make no difference as she does not seek to be a part of the family”.
• In the present case, the respondent was the daughter of Smt.Nirmala Devi who was a teacher in a government school. On her demise, her daughter (respondent), who was already married, had filed an application for compassionate appointment which was rejected. It was granted by the Tribunal and was appealed against in the HC. When the HC had concurred with the decision of the Tribunal, an SLP was filed in the Hon’ble SC.
• The Hon’ble SC in this case also relied upon Bhuvaneshwari’s case stated above and said that it completely agrees with the HC’s decision. No distinction is to be drawn between a married and unmarried daughter in case of compassionate appointment as the former is as much a part of the family as the latter.

And now, a question for our aspirants-

Right to Equality, enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution came into force on ______ .