Skip to content

CS Professional · Labour Laws and Practice · Constitution and Labour Laws

An employer runs a factory and employs women on night shifts without safeguards. A petition cites the Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan decision. A company secretary must explain its legal significance for workplace compliance. Which statement is most accurate?

Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan laid down binding guidelines against workplace sexual harassment, based on Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21, to fill the legislative vacuum. They covered all workplaces and operated until Parliament enacted the 2013 statute.

  1. AVishaka laid down binding guidelines under Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21 to prevent sexual harassment at work, filling a legislative gap until Parliament enacted a lawCorrect
  2. BVishaka struck down night shift work for women as unconstitutional
  3. CVishaka held that the guidelines apply only to government employers
  4. DVishaka was decided after the statute on sexual harassment at the workplace and interpreted its penalties

Explanation

In 1997 the Supreme Court, relying on Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g) and 21 and international conventions, issued guidelines that were law under Article 141 until legislation was made. They applied to all workplaces, public and private. Parliament later enacted the 2013 Act, so option D reverses the chronology.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Constitution and Labour Laws shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Constitution and Labour LawsFree diagnostic mock

More Constitution and Labour Laws questions