NEW DELHI — The Supreme Court has directed the Secretary of the Ministry of Women and Child Development to constitute a special cell to monitor the implementation of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, as amended in 2016, and ensure strict compliance with its provisions, LiveLaw reported on Wednesday, November 4. The court also directed the Centre to issue instructions to enforcement agencies through the respective Chief Secretaries of the states to ensure effective implementation of the law.

Source: LiveLaw

A bench comprising Justice S.V.N. Bhatti and Justice N.V. Anjaria passed the directions while disposing of a writ petition in Health for Millions v. Union of India, reported as 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 1127, which challenged the provisions of the 1986 Act, particularly Section 3, which originally prohibited the employment of children only in specified hazardous occupations and processes. The petition was disposed of after the court took note of the 2016 amendment to the Act, which introduced a blanket prohibition on the employment of children below 14 years of age in all occupations and processes, subject to limited exceptions. The amendment permits children to assist in non-hazardous family enterprises after school hours or during vacations, subject to the statutory conditions.

Source: LiveLaw (SC judgment record)

The bench observed that the prayers raised in the writ petition no longer survived for consideration in view of the legislative changes, but emphasised that the effective implementation of the amended law remained a responsibility of the authorities. In its order, quoted by LiveLaw, the court said: 'We take note of the writ prayers, the orders passed by this Court and also the amendment to the parent Act. We are of the view that the prayer, as made, in the writ petition does not survive for further consideration but what remains to be taken note of is giving complete and full effect to the changes introduced by way of amendment Act No. 35 of 2016.' It added that it shall be the responsibility of the respondents to ensure complete and strict compliance with the mandate of the Act, including the amended provisions.

Source: LiveLaw

'For the said purpose, with a view to preserving the rights of children/adolescents, we direct the second respondent to constitute a special cell, continue to monitor the implementation of the provisions of the Act and also issue directions to the enforcing agencies through the respective Chief Secretaries of the State, as amended through the Act No. 35 of 2016,' the court directed. For the petitioner, advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared with a team of counsel; for the respondents, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati appeared, according to the appearances recorded by LiveLaw. Sources: LiveLaw; 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 1127, Health for Millions v. Union of India.

Source: LiveLaw