(1) MR B.K. Panigrahi, former District Magistrate of Faridabad, who is present before us, states that the tubewell referred to in para 4(i) of his affidavit is in working order. (2) MR Uma Shankar, Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Faridabad who has now taken over as Administrator, HUDA, Hissar, states that although the estimates for providing electricity to the colony, were duly prepared and approved but no further steps were taken. This he states with reference to the statement made by Mr Panigrahi in his affidavit filed in February 1999 that "electricity is to be provided in the colony". Mr Panigrahi in his affidavit made it clear that these facilities in the colony were to be provided by the Municipal Corporation, Faridabad which itself was an independent statutory body. (3) MR Krishan Kumar, who has taken over as Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Faridabad who is also present before us, states that he has taken over the charge of Municipal Commissioner just 20 days ago. He further states that since the estimates have already been approved he would take up the job in right earnest and all necessary steps including floating of tenders will be taken by him expeditiously. He, however, states that floating of tenders and making arrangement for the funds will take time. It is further stated that the funds will be provided by the State of Haryana. The State of Haryana is also represented before us. We direct the State to provide all the necessary funds on the basis of the estimates already approved by the Municipal Corporation to the Corporation which may get the job (electrification) done through the agency of the Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam which admittedly, is a State-owned corporation. This would obviate the necessity of floating the. tenders and delaying the matter. The job shall be completed within a period of three months. The affidavit indicating the progress made in the matter shall be filed after every month. (4) SO also the deficiency indicated by Mr Panigrahi in his affidavit referred to above in para 4(0 that a 1.692 km water supply line is to be provided and also that 1.286 km of metalled roads are to be provided shall also be completed within three months. Two community toilets pointed out by Mr Panigrahi which are to be constructed in the colony shall also be completed within the same period. Two community toilets pointed out by Mr Panigrahi which are to be constructed in the colony shall also be completed within the same period. (5) WHILE laying down the water supply line, metalling of roads as also construction of community toilets, the Municipal Corporation shall also provide surface drainage in the colony which job was also to be completed by the Municipal Corporation as stated by Mr Panigrahi in his affidavit. The development charges, if not already paid by the stone-crusher owners, shall be paid and deposited with the Municipal Corporation within a period of one month from today. Otherwise, it will be open to the Corporation to recover the amount in accordance with law. It is made clear that the directions which have been given above for providing water supply line, completing of metalling of roads, construction of community toilets and electrification of the colony as also providing surface drainage, are not linked with the deposit of the development charges by the stone-crusher owners and the job shall be completed by the Corporation independently of it. (6) MR Panigrahi in his affidavit of February 1999 has also stated, inter alia, as under: "3. That the layout plan of stone-crusher workers housing plots was prepared by the Municipal Corporation, Faridabad in the year 1993 which was slightly modified in the year 1995. Even after the issue of offer of possession letters, only 98 owners took possession and remaining allottees did not take possession. Out of these 98 stone-crusher owners only 15 stone-crusher owners had raised construction of one- room tenements of residential plots. As per clause 17 of the allotment letter, the dwelling units were to be constructed during one year. The Municipal Corporation, Faridabad issued notice to the stone-crusher owners and resumed 141 stone-crusher workers housing plots on 3-4- 1998." (7) SINCE the Municipal Corporation, Faridabad has already resumed possession over 141 stone-crusher workers housing plots on 3-4-1998, we direct that dwelling units for these workers shall now be constructed on these plots by the Municipal Corporation, Faridabad with the financial assistance of the State Government. The cost of construction shall be recoverable from the stone-crusher owners. The cost of construction shall be recoverable from the stone-crusher owners. (8) THE land at Lakkarpur Khori which was considered, discussed and ultimately agreed upon to be cleared from encroachment in the meeting held at the residence of Mr D.D. Thakur, Senior Advocate, is indicated today to be a subject-matter of Writ Petition No. 8785 of 1999 pending in the Punjab & Haryana High Court in which an interim order is also indicated to have been passed on 12-10-1999. In the affidavit of the Municipal Commissioner, Faridabad it was indicated that the land at Lakkarpur Khori could not be cleared from encroachment in view of the judgment passed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in a group of writ petitions decided on 19-4-1999. Against the judgment SLPs (C) Nos. 13361-75 of 1999 have been filed in this Court in which the following interim order was passed: "DELAY condoned. Issue notice. Pending notice, the parties shall maintain status quo in respect of the land from where the respondents were sought to be evicted." (9) IN view of the above, since the land at Lakkarpur Khori is under litigation, the agreement reached in the meeting held at the residence of Mr D.D. Thakur, Senior Advocate in respect of that land shall not be given effect to. The Municipal Commissioner, Faridabad, who had earlier also offered an alternative site may now offer some other land for rehabilitating the bonded labourers. The land so offered will be free of litigation and would preferably be nearest to the place where the bonded labourers are at present residing. This offer will be made to Swami Agnivesh within two weeks from today and Swami Agnivesh shall file his response within two weeks thereafter. (10) SUO motu contempt notice issued to Mr B.K. Panigrahi, the then Deputy Commissioner shall stand discharged. Suo motu contempt notice issued to Mr Uma Shankar, the then Municipal Commissioner, is also discharged but he and the present incumbent Mr Krishan Kumar shall continue to attend the proceedings of the Court. (11) MR B.B. Bhatnagar, Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) and Mr Azad Singh, Deputy Labour Commissioner are present in person. Suo motu contempt notice issued to Mr Uma Shankar, the then Municipal Commissioner, is also discharged but he and the present incumbent Mr Krishan Kumar shall continue to attend the proceedings of the Court. (11) MR B.B. Bhatnagar, Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) and Mr Azad Singh, Deputy Labour Commissioner are present in person. They shall within two weeks, verify whether all the nine mine lessees to whom the notices have been issued are paying to their labourers wages commensurate with the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act and if any labourer is being paid less than the wage fixed under the Minimum Wages Act, particulars of that lessee, and the labourer shall be reported to this Court as it is contended by the learned amicus that payment of wages less than that fixed under the Minimum Wages Act amounts to "begar" within the meaning of Article 23 of the Constitution which is also an offence under Section 374 of the Indian Penal Code. All the nine mine lessees to whom notices have been issued in respect of the identity cards are duly represented before us today and they take notice of this order. Copy of this order shall also be sent to the remaining mine lessees. Mr Bhatnagar shall furnish the names of the remaining mine lessees. Mr Bhatnagar, Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) in his affidavit dated 22-10-1999 has, inter alia, stated as under: "3. In the affidavits dated 17-7-1997 and 18-3-1998 it was submitted that during period from 1985 to December 1996 (wrongly mentioned due to clerical mistake as 1988 instead of 1996 in affidavit dated 18-3-1998), the answering respondents had carried out 710 inspections under the Minimum Wages Act alone and had filed 626 prosecution cases against the employer for non-maintenance of records etc. resulting in 257 convictions. resulting in 257 convictions. During these inspections, 342 cases of less payment of wages than the minimum rates of wages notified by Central Government were detected and claim cases had been filed for Rs 43,28,931.10, out of which Rs 27,31,983 belonged to 83 claim cases which were sub judiced before Punjab and Haryana High Court, Rs 11,39,724 of 93 cases (out of 99 cases involved in Rs 13,68,019.92) sub judiced before Delhi High Court, Rs 4,35,544.00 mentioned in the order/directions dated 2-2-1996 in IA No. 2 of 1995 and Rs 5,21,679.73 awarded by the authority in 23 claim cases filed during the period of November 1995-December 1996. This was in addition to the payments amounting to Rs 4,39,853 paid by the employers to the workers after issue of inspection-report-cum-show- notices before filing the claim cases. In the affidavit dated 17-7-1997, it was also stated that dues of the workers amounting to Rs 4,35,554 mentioned in the interim order of this Honble Court dated 2-2-1996 were recovered out of which Rs 3,90,005 had been disbursed to the workers by making all-out efforts. The dues of the workers amounting to Rs 11,39,724 were involved in 93 cases (out of 99 cases of the total amount of Rs 13,68,019) which were sub judiced before Delhi High Court). They were reheard and the recovery applications are in process of being filed before CJM, Faridabad. The dues of the workers amounting to Rs 27,31,983 pertaining to the claim cases filed between 1985-88 which were sub judiced before Punjab and Haryana High Court were recalculated after the decision of this Honble Court dated 19-11-1996 and recovery applications were filed before CJM. The employers have challenged the recovery either before CJM himself or filed petition before Civil Judge, Faridabad contending that as per the Act they are required to pay either compensation or the interest but not both. The claim authority had awarded Rs 5,21,679.73 in 23 claim cases filed during the period from November 1995 to December 1996 out of which the employers had paid Rs 1,19,982.45 and for balance the recovery applications had been filed before CJM. 4. The claim authority had awarded Rs 5,21,679.73 in 23 claim cases filed during the period from November 1995 to December 1996 out of which the employers had paid Rs 1,19,982.45 and for balance the recovery applications had been filed before CJM. 4. During the period from January 1997 till December 1997, the Inspecting Officers carried out 534 inspections under various enactments under the Minimum Wages Act, the Payment of Wages Act (Mines Rules), the Contract Labour (R&A) Act and Equal Remuneration Act as a result of which 387 prosecution complaints were filed against the employers and 57 cases of less payment involving 407 workers were detected. The amount of short payment involved was Rs 3,55,452.12 out of which the employers paid Rs 1,37,851 before filing of the claim cases. In the affidavit dated 9-9-1998 the answering respondents had placed before this Honble Court the efforts made by them between 1-1-1998 to 31-7-1998 stating that the Inspecting Officers had carried out 308 inspections under the Minimum Wages Act and the Payment of Wages Act (Mines Rules) and had filed 158 prosecution cases against the employers for violations of non-maintenance of records etc. During these inspections 14 cases of less payment involving 53 workers were detected involving Rs 2,04,130. The employers paid Rs 29,165 out of the above amount to 25 workmen and for the balance amount claim cases have been filed before claim authority under Minimum Wages Act. It was also stated in the affidavit dated 9-9-1998 that the CJM, Faridabad had disposed of 54 cases during this period and imposed fines amounting to Rs 24,000 on the defaulting employers for violations such as non- maintenance or improper maintenance of records and registers. During the rehearings in 93 cases before the claim authority (out of 99 cases which were subjudiced before Delhi High Court) some of the employers deposited Rs 3,24,621." (12) THE facts stated in paras 3 and 4 above indicate that the mine lessees have been repeatedly and continuously committing gross violation of labour laws including non-payment of minimum wages. (13) THIS amounts to violation of various directions issued by this Court in its judgment dated 16-12-1983 in Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India and judgment dated 13-8-1991 in Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India. (13) THIS amounts to violation of various directions issued by this Court in its judgment dated 16-12-1983 in Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India and judgment dated 13-8-1991 in Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India. The State Government of Haryana may consider the feasibility of cancelling the leases of these defaulters and file their response within three weeks. (14) MR Vishwanath, Regional Labour Commissioner, Chandigarh is present in the Court. He states that proceedings for recovery of the amounts awarded under the Minimum Wages Act are pending before the CJM, Faridabad for a long time as the amount is recoverable as fine. Notice shall be issued to the CJM, Faridabad to file an affidavit in this Court within four weeks from the date this order is served upon him giving details of all the cases pending in his Court for recovery of the amount as also the stage of the recovery proceedings. (15) MR J.P. Kashyap, Director (Mine Safety), Ghaziabad under the Ministry of Labour is present in court. He has filed a further affidavit in which he has given the details of the injury sustained by the labourers working in different mines and also the particulars of the person who died while working in the mine. However, out of 18 cases, details of ten alone have been given which is contrary to the averment extracted below contained in the affidavit dated 14-9-1999 of Mr B.K. Panigrahi, the then District Magistrate, Faridabad: "THIS Honble Court may be pleased to observe that the affidavit submitted by the workers in person, mentioned above denying any accident or employment injury and also the fact that the petitioner has not given any details in response to the notice of the Commissioners, clearly proves that he has given a false affidavit before this Honble Court. This falsehood is further proved by the fact that in one of the cases mentioned by him in his affidavit (at Sl. No. 20, Mikha), the amount has already been deposited in the Court (copy of receipt of sum of Rs 2,03,850.00 dated 16-8-1999 in the Court is at Annexure F) of the Commissioner and some cases are still pending (at Sl. No. 2, Khaju and Sl. No. 16, Rama of the affidavit of the petitioner). It is important to observe here that in the case at Sl. No. 2, Khaju and Sl. No. 16, Rama of the affidavit of the petitioner). It is important to observe here that in the case at Sl. No. 2, a representative of the petitioner has made a complaint but did not produce the dependant of the deceased for reasons best known to him. In the case mentioned at Sl. No. 15 (Bablu) of his affidavit the petitioner is least aware that the dependant father of the deceased worker has withdrawn the claim on 25-6-1999, as he has made a claim before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridabad because the death occurred in the road accident with a truck (copy of affidavit of Shri Har Prasad, father of the deceased worker Shri Bablu for withdrawal of case and order of Compensation Commissioner allowing it is at Annexure G/12)." (16) IN view of the affidavit of Mr J.P. Kashyap, the above averments are not correct. Mr Panigrahi who is present in the Court has stated that he may be permitted to withdraw the affidavit. The affidavit shall be treated as withdrawn and will not form part of the record. (17) FROM the affidavit of Mr Kashyap, we are satisfied that appropriate action is being taken by him in the matter. Other cases may be examined by Mr Kashyap after the workmen concerned who have proceeded on leave are available. Photocopies of the documents required by the learned counsel for the parties shall be furnished to them by the office on payment of necessary charges. The amicus, will, of course, be supplied the copies free of cost. (18) LIST on 11-1-2000.