PROJECT REPORT ON

OFFENCES AND PENALTIES UNDER FACTORIES ACT 1948

IN THE COURSE

LABOUR LAW

SUBMITTED BY

PRINCELIE LESLIE FEREIRA

ROLL NO & PROGRAM NAME

27 AND 57 FYLLB - A

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF

PROF. APARNA SINGH

ACADEMIC YEAR

2023 - 2024
 DECLARATION BY LEARNER

We the undersigned MR. PRINCELIE FEREIRA AND MR. SHUBHAM MISHRA

here by, declare that the work embodied in this research project titled entitled
“OFFENCES AND PENALTIES UNDER FACTORIES ACT 1948” forms our own
contribution to the research work carried out under the guidance of PROF. APARNA SINGH it
is a result of our own research work and has not been previously submitted to any other
University for any other Degree/Diploma to this or any other University.

PRINCELIE FEREIRA
Name and signature of the
learner

SHUBHAM MISHRA
Name and signature of the
learner
Certified by

PROF. APARNA SINGH

Name and signature of the Guiding Teacher

Date: 30/ NOVEMBER / 2023
Place: Mumbai, Maharashtra
 INDEX
Page
TITLE
numbers
INTRODUCTION 1
SILENT FEATURES OF THE FACTORIES ACT 1948 1-2
OBJECTIVES OF THE FACTORIES ACT 1948 2-3
KEY DEFINATIONS 3
TO WHOME DOES THE FACTORIES ACT APPLY? 3-4
PENALTIES AND PROCEDURE UNDER THE FACTORIES ACT 1948 4-9
CASE LAWS 9-11
SHANKAR BALAJI WAJE VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 1962 AIR 517 9
SHRI SURESH KUMAR JALAN & ORS V. STATE OF BIHAR 2011 9-10

P. TRIVIKRAMA PRASAD V. THE STATE OF AP BY ITS ASSISTANT

10
INSPECTOR OF FACTORIES 2016

J.K. INDUSTRIES LTD AND OTHERS V. CHIEF INSPECTOR OF FACTORIES

11
AND BOILERS AND OTHERS: 1997 SCC (L&S)

FACTORIES ACT AMENDMENTS 11-13

AMENDMENT 1954 11-12
AMENDMENT 1976 12
AMENDMENT 1987 13
LATEST PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE FACTORIES ACT 1948 - BILL
13-15
2016
SUGGESTIONS 16-17
CONCLUSION 17
BIBILOGRAPHY AND WEBLIOGRAPHY 18

INTRODUCTION
In India, following independence, there was a rapid expansion of factories. However, there was
a glaring absence of legislation safeguarding the rights of workers in these factories. Numerous
unsatisfactory provisions relating to the health, safety, and welfare of workers were evident.
Recognizing this gap, the need for a comprehensive law to protect workers' rights became
apparent.

Subsequently, the Factories Act of 1948 was enacted and came into force on April 1, 1949. This
legislation was designed to ensure the protection of workers' rights by consolidating various
provisions under a unified framework. To reinforce compliance with the Factories Act, it
became imperative to establish penalties, leading to the incorporation of Chapter X in the Act.
This chapter outlines consequences for non-compliance, introducing punitive measures aimed at
deterring offenders.

The imposition of penalties serves to instil a sense of accountability and fear among potential
violators, encouraging adherence to the provisions outlined in the Factories Act of 1948.

SALIENT FEATURES OF THE FACTORIES ACT, 1948

The Factories Act of 1948 encompasses several crucial features that shape its regulatory
framework:

1. Broadened Definition of "Factory": The Factories (Amendment) Act of 1976 expanded the
scope of the term "factory" to include contract labor when determining whether a factory
exceeds a workforce of 10 or 20 employees.

2. Protection of Child Workers: The Act raised the minimum age for children employed in
workplaces from 12 to 14 years and reduced their daily working hours from 5 to 4 and a half.

3. Restrictions on Women and Children's Working Hours: The Act prohibits women and
children from working in factories between 7 p.m. and 6 a.m.

4. Elimination of Seasonal and Non-Seasonal Classification: The Act abolished the distinction
between seasonal and non-seasonal factories.

5. Provisions for Factory Registration and Licensing: The Act mandates the registration of
factories and the acquisition of valid licenses, subject to periodic renewal.

6. Empowerment of State Governments: State governments are entrusted with the responsibility
to ensure the registration of all factories and the issuance of valid licenses, with periodic
renewals.
7. Rule-Making Authority: The Act empowers state governments to formulate rules and
regulations that promote the collaboration of management and employee associations for the
welfare of employees.

8. Applicability to All Establishments: State governments have the authority to enforce the Act's
provisions on any establishment, irrespective of the number of employees and the nature of
manufacturing operations.

9. Precedence of Factories Act Over Indian Penal Code: In the case of Rabindra Agarwal v.
State of Jharkhand (2010), the Jharkhand High Court affirmed that the Factories Act, being a
special legislation, takes precedence over the Indian Penal Code.

These features collectively contribute to the comprehensive regulatory framework established

by the Factories Act, 1948, ensuring the well-being and rights of workers in the industrial sector.

OBJECTIVES OF THE FACTORIES ACT 1948

The primary objectives of the 1948 Act are:

1. Health and Safety Enhancement: The Factories Act of 1948 aims to establish safety measures,
enhancing the health and welfare of factory workers and protecting them from industrial
hazards.

2. Health Standards: The Act mandates cleanliness in all factories, ensuring essential safeguards
for worker health. This includes a proper drainage system, adequate lighting, ventilation, and
temperature control, along with clean water supplies. Accessible and clean restrooms and urinals
are also required.

3. Safety Measures: The Act mandates proper fencing of machines, restricts young adults from
operating dangerous machinery in enclosed spaces, and necessitates the provision of manholes
for emergency escapes.

4. Welfare Facilities: Factories must provide and maintain washing facilities, storage, drying
areas, seating, first-aid equipment, shelters, restrooms, and lunchrooms for workers.

5. Regulations on Employment: The Act imposes restrictions on the employment of women,

small children, and teenagers, regulating working hours, intervals, holidays, and annual leave
with pay.
6. Working Hours: Working hours are standardized for all workers, ensuring no adult works
more than 48 hours per week, with mandatory weekly holidays.

7. Ownership Responsibilities: The Act places restrictions on owners, occupiers, or heads of

manufacturing units to safeguard employees and ensure health and safety precautions.

8. Protection Against Exploitation: The Act protects workers from exploitation, seeking to
improve working conditions and the overall factory environment.

9. Penalties and Enforcement: Specific rules under the Act, if violated, lead to penalties,
including imprisonment for up to a year, fines up to one lakh rupees, or both. Misuse of
equipment related to welfare, safety, and health results in a Rs.500 fine for the offending
employee.

KEY DEFINATIONS

1. Section 2(b) defines Child: A person who has not completed 15 years of age.

2. Section 2(e) defines Certifying Surgeon: A surgeon or a registered medical practitioner

recognized by the State Government for the purposes of the Act.

3. Section 2(g) defines Inspector: An Inspector appointed under the Act.

4. Section 2(g) defines Manager: Any person responsible for the management or control of the
factory.

5. Section 2(n) defines Occupier: The person who has ultimate control over the affairs of the
factory.

6. Section 2(k) defines Premises: Includes the precincts of the factory.

7. Section 2(h) defines Court: The court having jurisdiction under the Act.

8. Section 2(l) defines Worker: A person employed in a manufacturing process.

9. Section 2(m) defines Factory: Any premises where a manufacturing process is regularly
carried out, meeting specific criteria regarding the use of power and the number of workers.

10. Section 2(j) defines Machinery: The term covers prime movers, transmission machinery, and
any other equipment and appliances that produce, transform, transmit, or apply power.

TO WHOM DOES THE FACTORIES ACT APPLY?

 The Factories Act is applicable across India, but only to factories with ten or more
employees with power and twenty or more employees without power. Section 85 of the
 Act, applies to factories with fewer employees.

Section 85: Power to apply the act to certain premises.

 The State Government has the authority to announce, through an official notification, that
certain rules of this Act will be applicable to a location where a manufacturing process
occurs, whether with or without power, even if:
 The number of employed individuals is below ten (with power) or twenty (without
power), or
 The individuals working there are not directly employed by the owner but have
permission or an agreement with the owner.
 This applies unless the manufacturing process is solely carried out by the owner with the
help of their family. Once a place is declared as such, it is considered a factory under this
Act. The owner is then recognized as the occupier, and anyone working there is
considered a worker. Note: The term "owner" includes a lessee or mortgage in possession
of the premises.

PENALTIES AND PROCEDURE UNDER THE FACTORIES ACT 1948

1) Section 92: General penalty for offenses

2) Section 93: Liability of owner of premises under special circumstances
3) Section 94: Enhanced penalty after previous conviction
4) Section 95: Penalty for obstructing an inspector
5) Section 96: Penalty for wrongfully disclosing results of analysis under section 91
6) Section 97: Worker’s offenses
7) Section 98: False Certificate of Fitness
8) Section 99: Double Employment of Child
9) Section 101: Exemption of occupier from liability in certain cases
10) Section 102: Power of court to make orders
11) Section 103: Presumption as to employment
12) Section 104: Onus as to age
13) Section 105: Cognizance of offences
14) Section 106: Limitation of prosecution

1) Section 92: General penalty for offenses

 The primary form of penalty is outlined in Section 92 of this Act. If any factory
formulates any provision, rule, or written order conflicting with the provisions of this
Act, both the occupier and manager shall be deemed in violation of this Act. The penalty
under the Factories Act may entail imprisonment for a term extending up to 2 years or a
fine reaching up to one lakh rupees. In the event of a continued contravention after
conviction, the fine may extend to one thousand rupees per day.
 In cases where a breach involves the safety rules for workers (Chapter IV or Section 87 -
Dangerous Operation) and results in a worker's death or serious injury, the offender faces
specific penalties. For a death, the fine is not less than twenty-five thousand rupees, and
for serious bodily injury, it's not less than five thousand rupees, according to this Act.

2) Section 93: Liability of owner of premises under special circumstances

 Under Section 93 of the Factories Act, 1948, the owner of premises may be liable for
penalties in specific situations. For instance, if a separate building within the premises is
leased for use as a factory, the owner is responsible for ensuring proper maintenance and
facilities for workers. This includes providing accessible roads, drainage systems, water
supply, lighting, and sanitation.

 The chief inspector, empowered by the state government, can issue directives regarding
the maintenance of facilities in the factory premises, such as proper roads, drainage
systems, water supply, and lighting.

 In cases where independent floors or flats within premises are leased to another occupier,
the occupier is obligated to ensure proper facilities. This encompasses checking the
adequacy of latrines, urinals, washing facilities, and proper fencing of machinery and
plants for worker safety. Additionally, it is essential to avoid placing materials on stairs
and common passages, leaving enough space for safe passage.

 Implementing fire safety measures and preparing for emergencies is crucial.

 Ensuring the regular maintenance of lifts and hoists is essential.

 The chief inspector assesses the mentioned facilities. If the owner of the premises fails to
adequately maintain these facilities, they may be considered the occupier and manager of
the factory. In such cases, the owner may face penalties.

3) Section 94: Enhanced penalty after previous conviction

 If someone has a prior conviction and repeats the same offense, the penalty is increased,
as specified in Section 94 of the Factories Act, 1948.

 If an individual commits an offense under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948, and
repeats the same offense under the same section, the punishment includes imprisonment
for up to three years, a fine ranging from 10,000 rupees to 2 lakh rupees, or both. If the
court imposes a fine less than 10,000 rupees, it must provide a specific reason for the
reduction.

 In cases where there is a violation of Chapter IV or Section 87, leading to an accident

resulting in death or serious bodily injury, the penalties are as follows: a fine not less
than 35,000 rupees for death and a fine not less than 10,000 rupees for serious bodily
injury.
4) Section 95: Penalty for obstructing an inspector

 When an inspector is deliberately obstructed from entering premises and exercising the
powers granted under this Act.

 When the inspector requests the production of any document or register for inspection,
access to these documents or registers is denied.

 When the inspector seeks to communicate with workers for inspection, but factory
members prohibit workers from talking to the inspector, sometimes withholding
information about the workers and preventing them from speaking.

 In case any of the above situations occur, the penalty is:

- Imprisonment for a period that may extend to six months or a fine that may extend to
10,000 rupees, or both.

5) Section 96: Penalty for wrongfully disclosing results of analysis under section 91

 Section 91 is crucial for penalizing offenses related to the publication or disclosure of

sample reports. If the results of a sample report are made public, it constitutes an offense.
The punishment for this offense includes imprisonment for up to six months, a fine
extending up to 10,000 rupees, or both.

 Additionally, penalties are outlined for contraventions of the provisions in sections 41-B,
41-C, and 41-H. Section 96-A specifies that contraventions of these provisions can result
in imprisonment for up to seven years and a fine of up to 2 lakh rupees. If the offense
persists after conviction, a daily fine of 5,000 rupees may be imposed. If the
contravention continues beyond one year, the imprisonment term can extend up to ten
years.

6) Section 97: Worker’s offenses

 As per Section 97, workers have specific duties outlined in Section 111 (see below).
Failure to fulfill these duties may result in a fine of up to five hundred rupees.

 If a worker is convicted of an offense under sub-section (1), the occupier or manager of

the factory can avoid liability by demonstrating that they took all reasonable care and
preventive measures. This would absolve them of responsibility for the actions of the
workers.

Section 111

Workers in a factory must follow certain rules:

a. They should not deliberately misuse any tools or facilities meant for ensuring the
health, safety, or welfare of everyone.
 b. They must avoid actions that could put themselves or others in danger without a good
reason.

c. Workers should not neglect to use any tools or facilities provided in the factory for the
health or safety of everyone.

If a worker violates these rules or any related regulations, they may face penalties,
including imprisonment for up to three months, a fine of up to one hundred rupees, or
both.

7) Section 98: False Certificate of Fitness

 Whoever knowingly uses or attempts to use, as a certificate of fitness granted to himself

under section 70, a certificate granted to another person under that section, or who,
having procured such a certificate, knowingly allows it to be used, or an attempt to use
it to be made, by another person, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to 2 months or with fine which may extend to 1,000 rupees or with
both.

Section 70

If an adolescent is granted a fitness certificate to work in a factory as an adult under

section 69(2)(b) and carries a token referencing this certificate while working, they are
considered an adult for all purposes in Chapters VI and VIII of the Act.

Additionally:

a. No female or male adolescent under seventeen, granted a fitness certificate to work

as an adult, can work in a factory outside the hours of 6 a.m. and 7 p.m.

b. The State Government can adjust these limits for specific factories through official
notification, but it cannot permit the employment of female adolescents between 10
p.m. and 5 a.m.

c. Exemptions from these rules can be granted in case of serious emergencies

involving national interest.

Any adolescent without a fitness certificate to work as an adult is considered a child for
all purposes under this Act.

8) Section 99: Double Employment of Child

 If a child is made to work in a factory, and parents, guardians, or anyone having

custody or control of the child forces them to do extra work for wages, the court
imposes a punishment, which may include a fine of up to one thousand rupees.
However, if parents, guardians, or the person in control can prove they weren't forcing
the child, they will be held not guilty.
9) Section 101: Exemption of occupier from liability in certain cases

 When charges are brought against the occupier or manager of the factory, they receive
a notice of intention. Within three days of receiving the notice, the manager or
occupier can file a complaint.
 The manager or occupier claims they are not the true offender, and another person is
responsible.
 The court conducts a cross-examination of the other person, inviting them for a
hearing.
 If the other person fails to appear in court, the proceedings are adjourned for three
months.

If, after this period, the court believes the real offender is the occupier or manager of the
factory, they will be punished.

10) Section 102: Power of court to make orders

 If the occupier or manager of a factory is found guilty of an offense under this Act,
the Court can, in addition to any punishment, issue a written order requiring them to
take specific measures to fix the issues for which the offense was committed. They
must do so within a specified timeframe, which the Court can extend upon request.

 During the specified or extended period , the occupier or manager will not be held
liable under this Act for the ongoing offense. However, if, after the period ends, the
Court's order is not fully followed, they will be considered to have committed a new
offense. The Court may then sentence them to up to 6 months in prison or impose a
fine of up to 100 rupees for each day the order is not complied with, or both
imprisonment and a fine.

11) Section 103: Presumption as to employment

 This section clarifies that if an individual is in close proximity to any machinery

within the factory during working hours, they will be regarded as a worker of the
factory. However, this provision does not apply if a person is near machinery during
breaks or rest intervals.

12) Section 104: Onus as to age

 In Section 104, onus refers to the responsibility to prove. The accused bears the
burden of proving their age. In such cases, a certificate from a certified surgeon
regarding age serves as evidence. This is particularly relevant when questions arise
about the age of workers in a factory.

 The responsibility of proving what is practical- In Section 104-A, if there is a

violation of the provisions of this Act or the rules made under it, legal proceedings
are initiated. The court issues its judgment and assigns responsibilities. Those who
fail to fulfill their duties must demonstrate that it is practically impossible or that
 they have taken all the necessary measures.

13) Section 105: Cognizance of offences

 In Section 105, no court can hear the case without the written permission of an
inspector. Only a presidency magistrate or a magistrate of the first class is authorized
to entertain such cases.

 Regarding the Limitation of Prosecution outlined in Section 106, when an offense is

discovered by the inspector, a complaint must be filed within three months from that
date. If someone wishes to file a complaint against the written order of an inspector,
the complaint must be filed within six months.

14) Section 106: Limitation of prosecution

 In Section 106-A, where the plant or factory is situated on that area of the court has
jurisdiction to entertain the case.

WHAT IS COMPENSATION UNDER THE FACTORIES ACT, 1948?

 According to the Act, if an employee faces accidents during work leading to death, or
disability (permanent, total, temporary, or partial), or acquires an industrial disease, the
business owner is obligated to provide compensation to the affected employee or their
family.

 For workmen, the compensation is calculated as 60% of the monthly wages of the
injured workmen, multiplied by the relevant factor, or an amount of ₹90,000 or more.

 The Factories Act, 1948, ensures that workers receive a minimum wage by specifying a
fixed pay rate. Employers are required to pay their employees at least the prescribed
minimum wage rate. Failure to do so means the employer must compensate the
employee with at least the legally mandated amount.

 CASE LAWS

 Shankar Balaji Waje vs State of Maharashtra 1962 AIR 517

Facts of the Case: The case involves the appellant, who owned a bidi production business. The
petitioner worked in the factory, rolling bidis with materials provided by the factory. No formal
agreement or contract existed, and the petitioner had flexibility in working hours. He could take
leave with the owner's consent and roll bidis at home if permitted. There was no direct
supervision, and the relationship was not that of a master and servant.

Issues Involved: The primary issue in question was whether the petitioner met the definition of
a worker under the Factories Act of 1948.
Judgement of the Case: As per Section 2(l) of the Factories Act of 1948, the court concluded
that the petitioner did not qualify as a worker in this case.

 Shri Suresh Kumar Jalan & Ors v. State of Bihar 2011

Facts of the Case: In this case, the petitioners, who served as directors of Carbon Resources
Private Limited, faced a Factory Act violation investigation. The factory inspector found
numerous infractions during the inspection, leading to the filing of a prosecution report against
the directors. Pursuant to Section 92 of the Factories Act, the Chief Judicial Magistrate assumed
jurisdiction over the case. The petitioners appealed to the High Court of Patna, seeking to annul
the Chief Judicial Magistrate's order.

Issues Involved:

The central issue was whether the petitioners' appeal to the High Court of Patna, aiming to
invalidate the Chief Judicial Magistrate's decision under Section 92 of the Factories Act, was
justified.

Judgement of the Case:

During the proceedings, the petitioner's legal representative presented evidence indicating that,
according to Section 92 of the Factories Act, only the manager or occupier could be held
accountable for factory violations. Despite the Chief Judicial Magistrate's ruling, which held
directors responsible under Section 92, the High Court of Patna quashed the order. The court
clarified that directors cannot be penalized under Section 92 of the Factories Act; only the
manager or occupier bears responsibility for violations. This case established the precedent that
directors are not liable for breaches of the Act; accountability rests with the manager or
occupier.

 P.Trivikrama Prasad v. The State of AP by its Assistant Inspector of Factories 2016

Facts of the Case: In this case, the deputy chief inspector of factories lodged a private
complaint against the petitioner for violating Section 32(a) and Section 41 of the Factories Act,
which are punishable under Section 92. The petitioner neglected to supply D-rings, ladders, and
helmets, leading to accidents and fatalities among workers during crane operations. The
petitioner, serving as the occupier/managing director or manager, was held responsible for the
lapses.
Issues Involved: The central question revolved around whether the criminal petition filed
against the accused would be rejected or permitted to proceed.

Judgement of the Case: The Hyderabad High Court ruled that the petitioner, as the occupier or
managing director, was at fault for failing to provide essential safety equipment and training to
employees. Consequently, the criminal petition against the respondent was dismissed and
quashed. The court held the petitioner accountable for negligence and the failure to ensure
proper safety measures in the factory.

 J.k. Industries Ltd and others v. Chief Inspector of Factories and Boilers and
others: 1997 SCC (L&S)

Facts of the case: The case involved J.K. Industries Limited and the Chief Inspector of
Factories. The issue revolved around the requirement for a director to sign the factory license
renewal application and whether an alternative nominee from the Board of Directors could
fulfill this role.
Issues involved: The main issue was whether the appointment of a nominee, other than a
director, as an occupier of the factory was valid, and whether this violated the constitutional
provisions.

Judgement passed: The court held that the appointment of a nominee, other than a director, as
an occupier of the factory was not valid. The judgement clarified that in the case of a company,
a director must be nominated for the purpose of the Factories Act. Moreover, it affirmed that the
use of the term "ultimate control" in the Act necessitated a director's appointment as the
occupier. Furthermore, the court clarified that the ultimate control over the factory rests with the
company through its board of directors.

FACTORIES ACT AMENDMENTS:

Amendment (1954):
In 1954, the Factories Act of 1948 underwent changes following India's acceptance of ILO
conventions against the night employment of women and children. The Factories (Amendment)
Act, 1954, effective from December 25, introduced key changes, including:

1. Expanded Manufacturing Process Definition:

- The definition of the manufacturing process now includes type composing for printing.

2. Safety Measures:

- Prohibition of women and young people from cleaning, lubricating, and operating motion
machinery.

- Introduction of safety criteria for lifting equipment in Section 29.

3. Working Hours:

- Employees can work continuously for 6 hours during a 6-hour shift without mandatory rest.

- Shift workers are exempted from overtime duties if they arrive late.

4. Leave Policy:

- Amendments to Chapter VIII on leave with pay, fixing 240 days of attendance and
increasing the limit on carried forward leaves.

5. Responsibilities Clarified:

- Section 93 rewritten to explain the responsibilities of the owner and occupier.

Amendment (1976):

In response to continued industrial growth, the Factories (Amendment) Act, 1976, effective
from October 26, 1976, introduced changes related to worker definitions, safety, and health
concerns:
1. Expanded Worker Definition:

- The definition of "worker" now covers contract labor.

2. Site Approval:

- Mandate for an approved plan and permission for the site.

3. Various Provisions Amended:

- Amendments to multiple provisions related to inspectors, certifying surgeons, cleanliness,

waste disposal, machinery fencing, work on or near machinery, and more.

4. New Provisions:

- Introduction of new provisions, including Section 36A (use of portable power lights),
Section 40B (safety officials for firms with 1000 or more workers), Section 88A (notice of
dangerous occurrences), and Section 91A (safety and health surveys).

Amendment (1987):

In response to the Bhopal accident, the Factories (Amendment) Act of 1987, effective from May
23, 1987, introduced stricter regulations on worker and public health and safety:

1. Focus on Hazardous Procedures:

- Addition of a new chapter IV A on hazardous procedures, with stringent restrictions and

penalties for violations.

2. Environmental Legislation:

- Simultaneous passage of the Environment (Protection) Act of 1986 and the Factories
(Amendment) Act of 1987, reflecting increased global awareness on safety and environmental
concerns.
LATEST PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE FACTORIES ACT 1948 - BILL 2016

The Factories (Amendment) Bill, 2016 aims to enhance the regulation of safety, health, and
welfare for factory workers. Seeking to amend the Factory Act, 1948, which has undergone
multiple revisions in the years 1949, 1950, 1951, 1954, 1970 and 1976. The proposed changes
respond to shifts in manufacturing practices, technological advancements, ILO Convention
ratifications, and judicial decisions.

Key Amendments Proposed:

1. Overtime Work Hours:

- The Bill aims to empower the Central Government, along with State Governments, to set
rules raising the upper limit of overtime work hours from 50 to 100 hours per quarter.

- In cases of exceptional workload and public interest, the proposed amendments allow an
increase in overtime working hours from 75 to 125 hours per quarter.

2. Background:

- Since the last amendment in 1987, significant changes have occurred in manufacturing
practices and technology.

- The Government of India introduced the Factories (Amendment) Bill, 2014, in response to
emerging challenges. The bill was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Labour,
which submitted its report in December 2014.

- In August 2016, the Minister for Labour introduced the present Bill in the Lok Sabha,
focusing on urgently amending Sections 64 and 65 related to overtime due to the anticipated
delay in passing the 2014 Bill. The Amendment Bill passed in the Lok Sabha on August 10,
2016, and is currently awaiting approval in the Rajya Sabha.

Features of the 2016 Amendment Bill:

1. Rule-making Authority:

- The Bill grants the State and Central Governments the power to establish rules on various
matters, such as double employment, details of adult workers in factory registers, and conditions
for exemptions for certain workers.
2. Exemptions for Workers:

- The State Government can define individuals in management or confidential roles and
exempt specific adult workers (e.g., those engaged in urgent repairs) from fixed working hours.
Both the Central and State Governments have the authority to make these rules.

3. Extension of Rule Duration:

- Rules formulated under the Bill will not be applicable for more than five years. However, the
Bill amends this provision, stating that the five-year limit does not apply to rules made after the
enactment of this Bill.

4. Overtime Hours:

- The existing Act allows the State Government to regulate overtime hours, with a maximum
limit of 50 hours per quarter. The Bill proposes to double this limit to 100 hours, with the
Central Government also having the authority to prescribe rules.

5. Exceptional Workload Overtime:

- If a factory faces an exceptional workload, the State Government can currently permit adult
workers to work overtime, capped at 75 hours per quarter. The Bill allows the Central or State
Government to raise this limit to 115 hours.

6. Public Interest Overtime:

- Introducing a new provision, the Bill allows the Central or State Government to extend the
overtime limit further to 125 hours. This extension can be granted due to excessive workload in
the factory and in the public interest.

Sl. Provisions of the Factories Act, Amendment Proposed

 No. 1948
1. In Section 2 of the Act, which interprets In the proposed Amendment Bill for the words
the used term, clause (p) defines "State Government" the words "Central Government
"prescribed" means prescribed by the rules or as the case may be, the State Government" shall
made by the State Government. be substituted.
2. In Section 64 of the Act for the words The words "Central Government or as the case may
"State Government ". be State Government " shall be substituted.
3. In Section 64, sub-section 4, clause(iv) In the proposed amendment Bill total number of
provides that total number of hours of overtime hours have been enhanced to 100 hours per
overtime shall not exceed 50 hours per quarter.
quarter.
4. In Section 64, sub-section 5, provides that The Bill proposes to remove the limitations of 5
Rules made under this section shall remain years period for the rules made after the enactment
in force for not more than 5 years. of this legislation.
5. In Section 65, sub-section 3, clause (iv) In the proposed Amendment Bill, the total number of
provides that in case of extra work pressure hours in overtime have been enhanced to 115 hours
and in public interest total number of hours in a quarter.
in overtime shall not exceed 75 in a After Clause (iv) of sub-section 3 it is further
quarter. provided that such overtime hours may be extended
in public interest upto 125 by the State Government
or Chief Inspector with the prior approval of State
Government as the case may be.

SUGGESTIONS

One potential loophole in the Factories Act, 1948, and its proposed amendments lies in the
enforcement mechanism. While the Act establishes penalties for non-compliance, there may be
challenges in effective implementation and monitoring. Insufficient resources, corruption, or
lack of stringent checks and balances could undermine the intended impact of the penalties.
To address the potential loophole, there should be a focus on strengthening the enforcement and
monitoring mechanisms. Here are some suggestions:

1. Increase Inspectorate Capacity:

-Allocate sufficient resources to the inspectorate to ensure an adequate number of qualified

inspectors.

- Regularly train and update inspectors on the latest amendments and global best practices in
industrial safety and workers' rights.

2. Utilize Technology:

- Implement technology-driven solutions for better monitoring and reporting of factory

conditions.

- Explore the use of data analytics and artificial intelligence to identify patterns of non-
compliance and prioritize inspections.

3. Whistleblower Protection:

- Establish a robust whistleblower protection mechanism to encourage workers and others to

report violations without fear of retaliation.

- Ensure that individuals reporting violations are shielded from any adverse consequences.

4. Public Awareness Campaigns:

- Conduct public awareness campaigns to educate both workers and factory owners about their
rights and responsibilities under the Factories Act.

- Foster a culture of compliance through outreach programs and communication channels.

5. Periodic Audits:

- Conduct periodic audits of the enforcement process to identify areas of improvement.

- Implement an independent auditing mechanism to assess the effectiveness of penalties and

their deterrent impact.
By addressing these aspects, the enforcement of penalties outlined in the Factories Act can
become more robust and effective, closing potential loopholes and ensuring the intended
protection of workers' rights and safety standards.

CONCLUSION

The Factories Act of 1948 in India stands as a pivotal legislation that addresses the rights,
safety, and welfare of workers in industrial settings. Enacted in response to the glaring absence
of worker protection laws post-independence, the Act has undergone amendments to adapt to
changing industrial practices and societal needs.

The Act's salient features, including the broadened definition of "factory," protection of child
workers, regulations on working hours for women and children, and empowerment of state
governments, contribute to a comprehensive regulatory framework. The objectives of the Act
focus on enhancing health and safety standards, ensuring the well-being of workers, and
imposing penalties for non-compliance.

Key definitions and provisions clarify the applicability of the Act, and penalties are outlined for
various offenses, promoting accountability. Through case laws, the judiciary has provided
interpretations and established precedents to guide the implementation of the Act.

The proposed amendments, as per the Factories (Amendment) Bill, 2016, reflect an awareness
of evolving industrial practices and seek to address emerging challenges. The focus on overtime
hours, rule-making authority, exemptions for specific workers, and considerations for
exceptional workloads demonstrates an effort to modernize and streamline the Act.

Overall, the Factories Act of 1948, with its amendments and proposed changes, plays a crucial
role in safeguarding the rights and well-being of workers in India's industrial sector,
emphasizing the importance of health, safety, and welfare in the workplace.

Bibliography
  Labour Industrial Laws (Dr. V.G. Goswami)
 Labour & Industrial Laws Bare Act 2023

Webliography

www.scconline.com
https://indiankanoon.org/
https://llbmania.com/
http://student.manupatra.com/
https://www.britannica.com/