Skip to content

CS Executive · Setting Up of Business, Industrial and Labour Laws · The Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act

Arjun, an adolescent, works from 9 a.m. to 12 noon at a workshop in Ludhiana run by Sharma Tools. After a lunch break, a second firm, Bedi Metals, engages him from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. the same day. Which statement is correct?

Bedi Metals cannot lawfully engage him. The Act forbids requiring or permitting an adolescent to work in an establishment on a day when he has already worked in another establishment. Total hours being low, or his consent, does not change this prohibition.

  1. ABoth engagements are lawful since total hours are within six
  2. BOnly Sharma Tools commits a breach, being the first employer
  3. CBedi Metals may not require or permit him to work, as he already worked in another establishment that dayCorrect
  4. DBoth are lawful if Arjun consents in writing

Explanation

Section 7(6) provides that no adolescent may be required or permitted to work in any establishment on a day on which he has already worked in another establishment. Bedi Metals' engagement breaches this regardless of total hours or consent. Sharma Tools' work was first and is not the breach.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on The Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise The Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) ActFree diagnostic mock

More The Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act questions