Allahabad HC: Continuing Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya Teachers On Contract For Years On Paltry Pay Is 'Forced Labour' Under Article 23

KanoonHQ Legal Gazette · AI-generated brief from the source linked below. How briefs are made

Published 31 October 2026

Case: Smt. Anamika Singh v. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad High Court
Bench: Justice Ashutosh Srivastava
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 263
Decided: 10 June 2024
Statutes: Constitution of India — s.23
Source: LiveLaw

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF)

In Smt. Anamika Singh v. State of U.P., the Allahabad High Court (Justice Ashutosh Srivastava) on 2024-06-10 held that continuing teachers in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalayas on contract for years with low pay amounts to 'forced labour' under Article 23 of the Constitution of India. The court directed the state to regularize their services.

Ratio Decidendi · Legal Principle Established

Continuing contractual employment for an extended period with meager remuneration, especially when the work is of a permanent nature, violates Article 23 of the Constitution of India, which prohibits forced labour. Such practice also infringes upon the right to dignity and fair wages.

Practice & Procedural Impact for Advocates

Advocates representing contractual employees in similar situations can argue for regularization based on the 'forced labour' doctrine under Article 23. Litigants in long-term contractual roles with low pay in government-funded schemes may have grounds to seek permanent employment and better wages.

Key Legal Takeaways

1Long-term contractual employment with low pay for permanent work can be deemed 'forced labour' under Article 23.
2The state has an obligation to ensure fair wages and dignified working conditions, even for contractual employees.
3Courts may direct regularization of services for employees subjected to such exploitative contractual arrangements.

The Legal Issue The Allahabad High Court addressed the practice of continuing teachers in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalayas (KGBVs) on contractual terms for many years with inadequate remuneration. The petitioners, who had been working as teachers in KGBVs for extended periods, sought regularization of their services, arguing that their prolonged contractual employment with low pay amounted to 'forced labour' and violated their fundamental rights.

Court's Reasoning Justice Ashutosh Srivastava, in the case of Smt. Anamika Singh v. State of U.P., observed that the teachers were performing duties of a permanent nature but were denied the benefits of regular employment and fair wages. The court held that compelling individuals to work for years on a contractual basis with paltry pay, especially when the work is essential and continuous, constitutes 'forced labour' as prohibited by Article 23 of the Constitution of India. The court emphasized that such a practice infringes upon the dignity of labour and the right to a living wage, which are integral to a dignified life. The bench noted that the state, as a model employer, has a constitutional obligation to ensure fair and equitable working conditions for its employees.

What Follows The Allahabad High Court directed the State of Uttar Pradesh to regularize the services of the petitioners and other similarly situated contractual teachers in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalayas. The court mandated that the regularization process should be completed within a specified timeframe, ensuring that these teachers receive the benefits and emoluments commensurate with regular government employees. This decision aims to end the exploitative practice of long-term contractual employment for permanent roles within state-funded educational institutions.