The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on a public interest litigation raising concerns over the occupational safety of construction workers and seeking measures to strengthen safety standards at construction sites.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana was hearing the PIL, which also seeks an inquiry into a construction-site collapse at Signature Global City in Gurugram.
Appearing for the petitioner, Advocate Prashant Bhushan submitted that the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code should prescribe detailed safety standards specifically addressing the risks faced by construction workers. He submitted that the petitioners had proposed guidelines based on Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) norms, arguing that the existing provisions do not adequately deal with construction-site hazards and safety precautions.
He also pointed out that the present framework does not provide for an adequate mechanism for an independent inquiry into construction accidents or for determining the compensation payable to workers affected by such accidents.
On the petitioner’s submission that safety requirements need to be backed by enforceable obligations rather than remaining merely as guidelines, CJI Surya Kant observed that a separate statutory framework governs construction licences and said that incorporating specific statutory obligations into that framework could make compliance easier. The Chief Justice also raised the possibility of requiring builders to maintain a dedicated corpus for construction workers as a condition for obtaining a construction licence.
“
“There’s a separate statute governing licences. If it creates statutory obligations, then it would be easier to implement. Builders are required to deposit different funds. Why not have corpus for construction workers? That can be a pre-condition for grant of licence.”
The Bench also examined whether the new framework under the Occupational Safety Code adequately addresses areas that were covered under the earlier rules. Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked Bhushan to provide a comparative chart identifying the gaps between the new rules and the earlier framework. He agreed to provide the chart.
During the hearing, it was submitted that the earlier framework contained provisions concerning construction safety which have since been repealed, while the standards presently notified under the new Code do not comprehensively address construction-specific hazards.
Mr Bhushan submitted that the existing standards primarily deal with aspects such as cleanliness and hygiene, ventilation, temperature and humidity, and precautions against dust, noxious fumes and other impurities, but do not sufficiently address safety of construction sites, construction equipment and other hazards associated with construction activity. The petitioner has accordingly proposed detailed guidelines drawing upon BIS standards.
The PIL also seeks an inquiry into the Signature Global City construction-site collapse in Gurugram, highlighting concerns regarding construction-site safety and the need for an appropriate mechanism to investigate such accidents. The petitioner has also sought measures to ensure accountability and adequate compensation for workers affected by construction accidents.