2. Prohibition of Employment of Children in Hazardous Employment — Article 24

This is the 2nd post in Constitutional Law-I, Unit 4 — the previous post covered Article 23's prohibition on traffic in human beings and forced labour, the first Right against Exploitation. This post covers Article 24, the second Right against Exploitation, which protects children specifically by prohibiting their employment in factories, mines, and other hazardous work.

The Problem This Topic Solves

A general prohibition on forced labour under Article 23 is not, by itself, enough to protect children. Children can be — and historically were — put to work in factories, mines, and other dangerous occupations with the "consent" of their parents or guardians, often out of sheer poverty, without any element of physical force at all. Because such employment is technically "voluntary" on the part of the parent, it would not automatically fall within Article 23's prohibition on forced labour. Yet a child working in a match factory, a fireworks unit, or a mine faces real risks to life, health, and physical and mental development, and loses the years that should be spent in school. Article 24 closes this gap: it does not require proof of force or coercion at all — it prohibits the employment of children below fourteen years in certain kinds of work outright, regardless of parental consent or economic necessity.

What Article 24 Says

Article 24 provides: "No child below the age of fourteen years shall be employed to work in any factory or mine or engaged in any other hazardous employment." This is a short but absolute provision — it fixes a clear age threshold (below fourteen years) and identifies three categories of prohibited work: employment in a factory, employment in a mine, and engagement in "any other hazardous employment", a residual category that Parliament and the courts have filled in over time through legislation and judicial interpretation.

The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986

Parliament gave detailed effect to Article 24 through the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 (renamed and substantially amended in 2016 as the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act). The 1986 Act, as amended, prohibits the employment of children below fourteen years in any occupation or process whatsoever (not merely a list of "hazardous" occupations, as under the original Act), subject to a narrow exception allowing a child to help in family enterprises or as an artist, outside school hours, provided the work does not endanger the child's safety, health, or education. The Act also regulates the employment of "adolescents" (aged 14 to 18) by prohibiting their employment in a specified list of hazardous occupations and processes, and imposes stringent obligations on employers regarding working hours, safety, and record-keeping wherever employment of adolescents is permitted.

What "Hazardous Employment" Means

"Hazardous employment" is not limited to obviously dangerous industrial settings; it covers any occupation or process that exposes a child to a real risk of injury, disease, or impairment to physical or mental development — historically, this has included match and fireworks manufacturing, glass and bangle-making units involving furnaces, mining, and construction work. Courts have consistently read this category broadly and purposively, in keeping with Article 24's protective object, rather than narrowly restricting it to whatever a statute's schedule happens to list at a given time.

M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu (1996)

Article 23 vs. Article 24 — At a Glance

Article 24 and the Right to Education — Article 21A

Article 24's protection is closely tied to the child's Right to Education under Article 21A (inserted by the 86th Constitutional Amendment, 2002), which guarantees free and compulsory education to every child between six and fourteen years of age. The two provisions reinforce each other: a child who is kept out of hazardous work under Article 24 is also, in the same age band, constitutionally entitled to be in school under Article 21A, rather than doing any other kind of unregulated child labour instead. This link was already anticipated in M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu, which ordered rehabilitated children to be given proper schooling well before Article 21A was formally inserted into the Constitution.

• Article 24 prohibits employing any child below fourteen years in a factory, mine, or other hazardous employment — no proof of force or coercion is needed, unlike Article 23
• The Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 (as amended in 2016) is the principal legislation giving effect to Article 24 — it bans child labour in any occupation/process (subject to a narrow family-enterprise/artist exception) and regulates adolescent (14–18) employment in hazardous occupations specifically
• In M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu (1996), the Supreme Court held children could not be employed in the manufacturing process of match/fireworks units, allowed only supervised packing work away from the manufacturing area, and ordered Rs. 20,000 per-child compensation from offending employers into a child-labour welfare fund
• Article 24 is enforceable against private employers directly, just like Article 23

• Article 21A (Right to Education, inserted by the 86th Amendment, 2002) works alongside Article 24 — a child protected from hazardous work is also constitutionally guaranteed free and compulsory schooling between the ages of six and fourteen
• The 2016 amendment to the Child Labour Act widened the ban from a limited list of "hazardous occupations" to a general prohibition on employing children below fourteen in any occupation or process, narrowing the old family-enterprise exception to non-hazardous work outside school hours
• Article 39(e) and (f) of the Directive Principles direct the State to ensure that children are not abused, and that their childhood is protected against exploitation and moral and material abandonment — courts read these together with Article 24 when interpreting the scope of "hazardous employment"

Looking Ahead — Article 25

Having covered both Rights against Exploitation (Articles 23 and 24), this unit now moves to the Right to Freedom of Religion. The next post covers Article 25 — the freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practise, and propagate religion.

A Practical Example

Suppose a thirteen-year-old boy from a poor family is sent by his parents to work at a small unlicensed firecracker unit in exchange for a modest daily wage, doing tasks that involve direct handling of explosive chemical compounds. The parents may have genuinely consented, and the boy himself may be willing to work to support his family — there is no physical force involved at all, so Article 23 would not directly apply here. Article 24, however, applies regardless: the boy is below fourteen years, and firecracker manufacturing is hazardous employment, so his employment is constitutionally prohibited outright. Following M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu, the employer would be liable to pay compensation into the child-labour welfare fund, and the State would be obligated to try to secure alternative employment for an adult in the family and ensure the boy is enrolled in school.

Quick Revision Points

• Article 24: no child below fourteen years can be employed in a factory, mine, or other hazardous employment — an absolute prohibition, not dependent on proof of force
• Key legislation: Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, amended 2016 — general ban on child employment, narrow family-enterprise/artist exception, separate hazardous-occupation restrictions for adolescents (14–18)
• M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu (1996): match/fireworks manufacturing children barred from manufacturing process, limited to supervised packing away from the manufacturing area; Rs. 20,000 per-child compensation from employers; State to arrange alternative adult employment and schooling
• Article 24 works together with Article 21A (Right to Education) to ensure a child kept out of hazardous work is also guaranteed schooling
• Enforceable directly against private employers, like Article 23