Bonded Labor in India: Its Incidence and Pattern
My report on Kol tribal (Roy, Arindam, “Breaking the Shackles: Kol Tribal Labourers”, Economic and Political Weekly, Feb. 5, 2000) has been quoted in a prestigious study: Bonded Labour in India: Its Incidence and Pattern, By Ravi S. Srivastava, Special Action Programme to Combat Forced Labour; DECLARATION/WP/43/2005
[Please see pp 17-18 of the Working Report of Ravi S Srivastava ]
5.2 Bonded Labour Systems among Tribals
The Scheduled Tribes belonging to Orissa, Chhatisgarh, Harahan, Madhya Pradesh,
Southern Uttar Pradesh, Uttaranchal, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and
Gujarat, who have suffered a gradual erosion of access to traditional livelihood systems, have long been subject to exploitative debt relations leading to loss of land and bondage to non-tribals. The National Commission on Rural Labour devoted some attention to this issue.
Prasad (2001) has reported that in Dakshin Kannada and Udupi districts in Karnataka, the Koraga tribal community of nearly 10,000 people suffers under a system of bondage called Ajalu. The Malekudiya tribal community in Belthangady Taluk of Dakshin Kannada district has been held in the plantations of the masters called Hebbars. The community is denied mobility or the freedom to have their own gardens which could give them some economic independence.
In Orissa, a survey by the NGO Action Aid and twenty other organisations in Malkangiri district, carved out of Koraput, identified 704 bonded tribal labourers. The organisations concluded that there were possibly thousands of tribals from thirteen different tribes working as bonded labourers to landlords in the district (Mander, 2003). The tribals, who had lost most of their land to non-tribals, lived on the brink of subsistence and had no option but to take loans from landlords. In exchange, they or their children were required to work for the landlords for little more than food and some other minor perquisites. Their low wages were adjusted against the interest on the loans they had taken.
The NHRC examined a number of complaints regarding the status of Kol tribals in the districts of Chitrakoot (Madhya Pradesh), Allahabad and Mirzapur (Uttar Pradesh).
These have stated that due to dispossession from land, loss of rights to forest produce, illegal quarrying and control of mafias over mining, the Kols were living in bondage and were denied minimum wages. Many of these complaints were upheld by the Commission, which also took the view that the existing system of auction of mining rights, which gave a virtual monopoly to dominant economic interests and prevented tribals from bidding through their self-help groups (SHGs), was totally unjust and led to the exploitation of the tribals (NHRC Annual Report 1999-00).
The NHRC set up an Expert Group in 2000 to examine the problems of the Kol tribals and to develop measures for their social and economic upliftment. According to their
Report (NHRC,2000),the system of bondage was widespread in the Shankargarh silica and sandstone mining region of Allahabad. The silica lease rights for 6 villages were placed with one feudal landlord who mined the area both legally and illegally with the help of contractors. Although a large number of bonded labourers had been released after the promulgation of the Bonded Labour System Abolition Act, very few had received rehabilitation grants. The system of bondage still persisted in the area. In some villages, SHGs formed by tribals had been given sandstone mining rights, leading to a tripling of their income (Roy, 2000; NHRC, 2000).
[Please see p 34 of the Working Report of Ravi S Srivastava ]
6. Elimination of Bondage: Nature and Scope of Interventions
The existence of bonded labour is an affront to basic human dignity. There has been some change in the nature and incidence of bonded labour in India as a result of various factors, including the impact of social change and social movements, economic modernisation and State intervention. While these processes have impacted positively on the unfree status of labour in traditional agriculture and in some other sectors, the incidence of bonded labour still remains high in some segments of unorganised industry, the informal sector and in the relatively modern segments of agriculture in some areas.
The Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act created a legislative framework for the elimination of bonded labour in 1976. But, as both the Supreme Court and the NHRC have shown, its implementation by the States has generally remained weak.
The Supreme Court of India has, in a series of judgements, given directions to improve the situation and since 1997, under its direction, the National Human Rights Commission has been directly involved in monitoring the situation and making reports to the Court. In its order of November 11, 1997, passed in the writ petition No. 3992 of 1985 – PUCL vs State of Tamil Nadu and others, the Supreme Court has entrusted to the NHRC the responsibility of monitoring the directions of the Court issued from time to time and the implementation of the provisions of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act.
The NHRC started monitoring the implementation of the Act in 13 states identified as Bonded Labour Prone states. These are: Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Bihar,
Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh. The Commission has appointed two Special Rapporteurs, Mr. Chaman Lal and Mr. K. R. Venugopal, who have been constantly reviewing the situation in bonded labour prone states and sectors.
The Special Rapporteur in the Northern States has focused on the carpet belt of Uttar
Pradesh consisting of the districts of Varanasi, Bhadohi, Mirzapur, Jaunpur, Sonbhadra and Allahabad, where most of the children employed are migrants from the state of Bihar and Jharkhand, working under extremely oppressive conditions against some petty advances paid to their parents. Their cases are invariably found to be attracting the provisions of the Bonded Labour System Abolition Act (Chaman Lal, 2003). The Special Rapporteur has also focused on the problem of Kols in the Pathar area of Uttar Pradesh and has held regular review meetings with officials in the States of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan. He has also been assisting the Commission in monitoring and reviewing the situation in other North Indian States and in ensuring that rehabilitation of bonded labourers, especially migrant labourers, takes place on a long-term basis.
In the Southern states, the Special Rapporteur, Mr. K. R. Venugopal, has tried to move in a convergent direction by involving and influencing a number of departments and by including policy making within the ambit of his work. He has particularly highlighted the issues of bonded quarry workers in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh and bonded labour in silk weaving and powerloom industries in Tamil Nadu. He has held regular meetings with officials in the States of Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh.
The Special Action Group constituted by the NHRC and the institution of the Special Rapporteurs has breathed some life into the legislative system and has given support to the grass-root NGOs that have been involved in taking up issues of bonded labour. Further, in September 2000, the NHRC constituted an Expert Group headed by Mr S.
R. Sankaran, to make an assessment of the Bonded Labour situation in the country, examine the extent and effectiveness of the Bonded Labour Laws and enforcement mechanisms and review the functioning of the Centrally Sponsored Scheme for the rehabilitation of the released labourers. The Commission has also constituted groups to study the problem of bonded labour and child labour in a number of areas, including the Kol tribals in Uttar Pradesh and the lock makers of Aligarh.
The identification of bonded labourers continues to present difficulties, and only a small number of bonded labourers are actually identified, almost always due to the persistent efforts of NGOs (NHRC Annual Report, 2000-01). But among those labourers who have been identified and released from bondage, the NHRC finds that the rehabilitation of migrant labourers is being totally neglected (Chaman Lal, 2003).
This is also the view of the Supreme Court of India.49 There can be no doubt that effective prevention of bondage amongst vulnerable groups and the rehabilitation of freed child and adult bonded labourers are complex issues, requiring sustained action from governments, NGOs and the international community.
The Ministry of Labour, Government of India had initiated a Centrally Sponsored Scheme under which Rs 4,000 was initially provided for the rehabilitation of each bonded labourer, to be equally contributed by the Federal and the State government. The amount has since been gradually raised, reaching Rs. 20,000 in May 2000. The Central government also provides assistance for surveys, awareness campaigns and evaluations. Released bonded labourers are given priority in a number of government programmes, such as the distribution of government land, and some States have initiated specific programmes for their rehabilitation. But, by and large, the process of rehabilitation is frequently delayed, particularly in the case of inter-state bonded migrant labourers, and the degree of concerted convergent action required on the part of the administration is rarely forthcoming. Prosecution of employers is also weak.
Since the bonded labourers are very poor and assetless, some can relapse into bondage, while others may experience only a very marginal increase in income. Not being from an entrepreneurial background, bonded labourers may not be able to earn significantly higher incomes or even retain their assets (Mutharayappa, 2002). The National Human Rights Commission has been trying to make the states undertake rehabilitation of the bonded labourers through convergent action, and through helping the bonded labourers form groups or cooperatives which can take up economic activity on a sustained and viable basis. As discussed earlier, in Allahabad district, the Commission has supported the granting of mining leases to SHGs of Kol tribals and opposed a system of action which excludes these groups from bidding for the mining rights.
Since bondage results from severe deprivation arising from lack of assets and adequate livelihood opportunities, a key focus of rehabilitation has to be on providing assets and means of livelihood to the bonded labourers. Efforts to do this are more likely to succeed if the poor are empowered and collectively organised, and if they have the capacity to undertake new activities. Vidyasagar (2001) notes that the distribution of land to 44 bonded labourer families in Kodaikanal was successful because the labourers were given other infrastructural facilities and were supported in their endeavours by an NGO. More importantly, the labourers were used to cultivating land in a similar ecological setting. In another case, cited by Vidyasagar, bonded labourers who were working in stone quarries in Pudukottai district were released by the district administration during the early ‘90s, which also took the initiative in rehabilitating them. The workers were organized into co-operative societies which were provided with quarrying contracts. The rehabilitation money was pooled together to purchase trucks for transportation. Women were given authority within the societies and provided proper training to enable them to fulfil their functions. The Tamil Nadu Government amended the rules under Section 15 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957, to allow the grant of stone quarrying leases to the released bonded labourers. This became one of the very successful cases of rehabilitation of bonded labour in Tamil Nadu (Murthy 2001).
In the case of the Kol tribals engaged in quarry mining in Shankargarh district of Allahabad, a protracted process of empowerment and organisation led to formation of groups and to demands for lease rights. Due to a supportive district administration and the arduous work of organisations like Sahyog, Sankalp and Mahila Samakhya, the kols gained mining rights in a number of villages, were able to overcome the opposition of contractors and nearly treble their income over a short period of time, drastically reducing bondage in the area.50 However, crucial issues of building managerial capacity and cohesiveness among the self-help groups still remain important.51
Similarly, eleven Sahariya families freed from bondage in a quarry with the help of
an NGO, Bandhua Mukti Morcha, were given lease rights to a 70-bigha quarry in
Shivpuri district of Madhya Pradesh. This has resulted in higher incomes for the labourers and high royalties for the government. The district administration started a number of convergent schemes to help the released labourers, including the opening of a school and the grant of land. When the contractors refused to pick up the stones, the families were given a tractor and trolley for transport (Bal, 2003). The district, according to BMM, has over 15,000 bonded labourers still working in the stone quarries.52
50 Roy, 2000. Interview with Justice Amar Saran, a former member of the Vigilance Committee in Allahabad, and member of the NHRC Group formed to investigate the condition of the Kols in the Pathar area of Uttar Pradesh.
51 Interview with Sheba Jose, Convenor, Sahyog.
52 For more details, see the CEC submission to the Planning Commission. (CEC 2001b)
[Please see p 41 of the Working Report of Ravi S Srivastava ]
Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Condition
of Service) Act, 1996, Ministry of Labour, Government of India. Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition), Act, 1970, Ministry of Labour, Government of India. Equal Remuneration Act, 1976, Ministry of Labour, Government of India
Inter-State Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Condition of Service)
Act, 1979, Ministry of Labour, Government of India
Minimum Wages Act, 1948, Government of India
Bonded Labour System Abolition Act (1976), Government of India
Reports, Books, Articles and Papers
Anonymous (2000). “Campaigning Against Bonded Labour”, IFWEA Journal,
Anonymous, 2004, “29 Children Enslaved at a circus rescued” April 23,
Ateeq, Nasir and John J. (2003), “Migrant Labour in the Brick Kilns of Punjab” in G.
Iyer (ed.) Migrant Labour and Human Rights in India, New Delhi: National Human Rights Commission, India.
Athreya, V., Djurfeldt, G. and Lindberg, S. (1990), Barriers Broken: Production Relations and Agrarian Change in Tamil Nadu. Sage: New Delhi and London.
Awasthy, Supriya (2003), “From Crisis to Liberation”, Satya, June-July.
Bal, H.S. (2003). “MP Bonded Labourers Mine Own Business”, The Indian Express,
Bardhan P. K. (1984), Land, Labour and Rural Poverty: Essays in Development Economics, OUP, Delhi.
Bardhan P. K. and A. Rudra (1981), “Terms and Conditions of Labour Contracts in
Agriculture: Results of a Survey in West Bengal 1979", Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, February, pp. 89-111.
Bardhan, P.K., and Rudra, A (1978), “Interlinkages of Land, Labour and Credit
Relations: An Analysis of Village Survey Data in East India", Economic and
Political Weekly, Annual Number, Feb., pp. 367-384.
Bhalla, S. (1976), “New Relations of Production in Haryana Agriculture", Economic and Political Weekly ROA, March, pp. A23-A30.
Bharadwaj, K. (1979), "Towards a Macro-economic Framework for a Developing
Economy: The Indian Case", The Manchester School, September, pp. 270-
Brass, Tom (1996). “Misinterpreting Unfree Labour in Contemporary Haryana”,
Economic and Political Weekly, August 17.
Breman, Jan (1974), Patronage and Exploitation: Changing Agrarian Relations in
South Gujarat, India, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Breman, Jan (1985), Of Peasants, Migrants and Paupers: Rural Labour and
Capitalist Production in Western India, Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Breman, Jan (1994a), Wage Hunters and Gatherers: Search for Work in the Urban and Rural Economy of Gujarat, Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Breman, Jan (1994b), ‘Capital and Labour in the Cane Fields’, in Breman, Jan
(1994), Wage Hunters and Gatherers: Search for Work in the Urban and
Rural Economy of Gujarat, Delhi: Oxford University Press (originally published in the Journal of Peasant Studies, July 1990).
Breman, Jan (1996), Foot Loose Labour, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Breman,, Jan, Peter Kloos and Ashwani Saith (1997), The Village in Asia Revisited,
Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Centre for Education and Communication (2001a). “The Trap They Dig. A Fact
Finding Report on the Marble, Masonry Stone and Sandstone Mines of
Rajasthan”, New Delhi.
Centre for Education and Communication (2001b). Submission on Bonded Labour in
India made to the Working Group on Worst Forms of Labour, constituted by the Planning Commission, Government of India, August.
Centre for Education and Communication (2004). Debt Bondage in India: An
Indicative Report, New Delhi: CEC.
Chakravorty, Bhaswati (2004), “The Shadowy People”, The Telegraph, Calcutta.
Chamaraj, Kathyani (2002), “Slavery is alive and well”, Humanscape Magazine, Vol.
IX Issue III, March (web edition at humnscapeindia.net).
Chamaraj, Kathyani (2003), “Making Statues from Black Stone”, HumanscapeMagazine, Vol. X, Issue VIII, July. Vol. IX Issue III, March (web edition at humnscapeindia.net).
Chopra, Suneet (2001), “Shameless Violation of Human Rights in UP”, People’s
Democracy, Vol. XXV, No. 16, April 22.
Commission for Investigating Bonded Labour Tamilnadu, (2003). “Report of The Commission on Bonded Labour in Tamilnadu Submitted to The Supreme
Court of India”.
Corta, Lucia da and Venkateswarlu (1999), “Unfree Relations and the Feminisation of
Agriculture Labour in Andhra Pradesh, 1970-95”, in Byres, T. J., Kapadia, K. and Lerche, J. (1999), Rural Labour Relations in India, London: Frank Cass.
Das, Biswaroop (1993), “Migrant Labour in Quarries and Brick-kilns: An Overview”,
Surat: Centre for Social Studies (mimeo).
De Neve, G. (1999). “Asking for and giving baki: neo-bondage, or the interaction of bondage and resistance in the Tamilnadu power-loom industry”. Contributions to Indian Sociology 33, 1&2, 379-406
Department of Labour, Government of Arunachal Pradesh (1999). “Minute of the District Level Screening Committee Along with Checklist for Release and Rehabilitation of Bonded Labour”, March 19.
Ganguly, Varsha (2001). “Exploitation and Poverty Plague Agariyas”, Labour File,
December 2000-January 2001.
Gani, A., and Shah, M., A. (1998). “Child Labour in Carpet Industry of Kashmir”
Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol.-33, No. 3, January.
Ghosh, Ruma (2004) “Brick Kiln Industry: Vulnerability, Migration and Labour
Processes”, NOIDA, V. V. Giri National Labour Institute, mimeo.
Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Labour Bureau, Report on the Second Agricultural Labour Enquiry 1956-57. Vols. 1 and II. Simla, 1960.
Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Labour Bureau, Rural Labour Enquiry. 1963-65, Main Report. Simla.
Goyal, K.K. (2003). “Dalit Women Say no to Bonded Labour”, The Tribune,
Chandigarh, June 7.
Gupta, Jayoti (2003). “Informal Labour in Brick Kilns: Need For Regulation”
Economic and Political Weekly, August 2.
Human Rights Watch (1996). “The Small Hands of Slavery: Bonded Child Labour in
India”, New York.
Human Rights Watch (2003). “Small Change: Bonded Child Labour in India’s Silk
Industry”, Vol. 15, No. 2 (C), New York, January.
International Labour Office (2001a). “Stopping Forced Labour”, Global Report Under the Follow-up to the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at work, Report I (B), Geneva.
International Labour Organisation (2001b). “Practical Approaches to Bonded Labour in India”, Background Paper, ILO Social Finance Programme, South Asian debt Bondage Project.
International Labour Organisation (2002a). Findings on Debt Bondage: Baseline
Study into Vulnerability to Debt Bondage in Rangareddy District in Andhra Pradesh, India, ILO, Social Finance Programme (Prepared by S. Subrahmanyam).
International Labour Organisation (2002b). Rapid appraisal into Vulnerability to Debt
Bondage in Kolar, Bidar, Belgam and Chamrajnagar Districts in Karnataka, India, ILO, Social Finance Programme (Prepared by Ajit Mani. International Labour Organisation (2004). “A Note on ILO’s Project on Promoting the Prevention and Elimination of Bonded labour in South Asia”, New Delhi, June.
Iyer, Gopal, K. (2004). “Effects of Interventions by NGO in the Elimination of Child
Labour: Migrant Child in Carpet Industry”, in K. Iyer et. al. (ed) Distressed
Migrant Labour in India- Key Human Right Issues, New Delhi, National
Human Right Commission, India.
Iyer, Gopal, K., Singh, Veer and Arya, P.P. (2004). “Distressed Migration: Causes and Consequences”, Distressed Migrant Labour in India- Key Human Right Issues, New Delhi: National Human Right Commission, India.
Jha, Praveen K. (1997), Agricultural Labour in India, New Delhi: Vikas Publishing
Jodhka, S.S. (1995). “Agrarian Changes, Un-freedom and Attached Labour”
Economic and Political Weekly, August 5-12.
Jodhka, Surinder S. (1994), “Agrarian Changes and Attached Labour: Emerging
Patterns in Haryana Agriculture”, Economic and Political Weekly. Sept. 24.
Jodhka, Surinder, S. (1996). “Interpreting Attached Labour in Contemporary
Haryana”, Economic and Political Weekly, May 25
John, J. (1996). “Chirala’s Weavers: They Weave Death and Life.” Labour File, September.
John, J, (2001), “Editorial”, Labour File, December 2000-January 2001, New Delhi.
Juyal, B N (1993): Child Labour in the Carpet Industry in Mirzapur-Bhadohi,
International Labour Organisation, New Delhi.
Kannan, Ramya (2001), “Over Thousand Families in Bonded Labour”, The Hindu online edition, August 3.
Kannan, Ramya (2003a), “Rescued labourers running from pillar to post”, The Hindu
Online Edition, June 24.
Kannan, Ramya (2003b), “27 Bonded Children rescued from U.P. sweet units”, The
Hindu, April 7.
Kapadia, Karin (1995), “The Profitability of Bonded Labour: The Gem Cutting
Industry of Rural South India”, The Journal of Peasant Studies, 23:3, April,
Kapadia, Karin (1996), Siva and Her Sisters. Gender, Caste and Class in Rural South
India. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Kumar, D. (1965), Land and Caste in South India. Cambridge: CUP.
Lahiri, Souparna (2000). “Bonded Labour and the Tea Plantation Economy”, Revolutionary Democracy, Vol.-VI, No-2, September.
Lahiri, Souperna (1997). “Labour in Bondage: The Indian Context”, Labour Update,
Lal, Chaman (2003). “NHRC and Enforcement of Bonded Labour Act” in G. Iyer
(ed.) Migrant Labour and Human Rights in India, New Delhi: National Human Rights Commission India.
Mander, Harsh (2003), “In bonded servitude”, Frontline, Vol. 20, Issue 02, Jan. 18-
Mehta, Swati Bhagwan Das (2001). “A Socio-economic Study of Bonded Child
Labour in India”, Masters Thesis, Department of International Relations, Tufts University.
Meir, Gadi (2001). “Child Rights-Silence of The Bonded”, Frontline, Volume-18,
Menon, Meena (2003), “Escape from Bondage”, The Hindu online edition, September
Mine Labour Protection Campaign (2000) Bonded Labour in Small-Scale Mining,
Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India, Jodhpur, mimeo.
Mines Minerals and People (MMP), (2003). “Labour and Women in Mining”, Indian
Women and Mining Seminar, Delhi, Back Ground Paper.
Ministry of Labour, Government of India (1991a), Report of the National Commission on Rural Labour, Vol. 1 (NCRL Report), New Delhi (chapter 8, Bonded
Labour, pp. 100-114)..
Ministry of Labour, Government of India (1991b), Report of the National Commission on Rural Labour, Vol. 2 Study Group on Bonded Labour, National Commission on Rural Labour, New Delhi.
Ministry of Labour, Government of India (1994). “Reports of the Central Committee to Draw up a Workable Definition of Bonded Labourers and also the Modalities of Procedures for Identification of Bonded Labour”, New Delhi.
Ministry of Labour, Government of India (Various Years), Annual Report, New
Ministry of Labour, Government of India, List of 190 Sensitive Districts from Where
Incidence of Bonded Labour System are Reported from Time to Time (mimeo).
Mishra, L. (2001) A Perspective Plan to eliminate forced labour in India, W.P. 2,
Infocus Programme on Promoting the Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, Geneva: I.L.O.
Mundle, S. (1979), Backwardness and Bondage: Agrarian Relations in a South Bihar
District, Indian Institute of Public Administration, New Delhi.
Murthy, Rajani K. (ed.) (2001), Building Women’s Capacities, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Mutharayappa, R. (2002). “Rehabilitated Bonded Labourers in Rural Karnataka”.
Indian Journal of Social Work, Vol. 63, Issue 3, July.
National Commission for Human Rights (2000) Plan for Upliftment of Kols in Patha Region of UP, New Delhi (mimeo).
National Human Right Commission, Annual Report, Various Years, New Delhi.
National Human Rights Commission (2001). Report on the Expert Group on Bonded
Labour, New Delhi (mimeo).
Noronha, P. (2003). “Escape From Bondage”, The Hindu, September 07.
Olson, Wendy K. and R. V. Ramana Murthy (2000), “Contract Labour and Bondage in Andhra Pradesh, India, Journal of Social and Political Thought, Vol. 1, No. 2, June.
Patnaik, U. (1983), "On the Evolution of the Class of Agricultural Labourers in
India", Social Scientist, July.
Patnaik, Utsa and Dingwaney, M. (1985), Chains of Servitude : bondage and slavery in India, Delhi : Sangam Books.
People’s Vigilance Committee on Human Rights (2002a). “Bonded Labour from Musahar Community in Danger”, PUCL Bulletin, June.
People’s Vigilance Committee on Human Rights (2002b). “Bonded Labour in Brick
Kiln-Workers and Families Held in Bondages”, PUCL Bulletin, June.
People’s Vigilance Committee for Human Rights, (2002c), “Workers and families held in bondage”, PUCL Bulletin, June.
Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (2000). “Bonded Labourers in a Stone Quarry”, PUCL Bulletin, June 13.
Prabhu, Pradeep (2001). “Salt Workers Struggle in Thane”, Labour File, December 2000-January 2001.
Prasad, Kiran Kamal (2001), “Some Reflections on Bonded Labour”, Integral Liberation, Vol. 5, No. 2, June.
Priyanka, K. (2004). “Bonded Labour: Paradox of Punjab’s Prosperity”, Hindustan Times, May 4.
Rajalakshmi, T. K. (2001), “Slavery amidst prosperity”, Frontline, Viol. 18 – Issue
15, July 21-August 3, Chennai.
Rajalakshmi, T. K. (2004), “Unorganised, Exploited”, Frontline, Vol. 21, Issue 5,
Rajalaxmi, T.K. (2001). “Slavery Amidst Prosperity” Front Line, Volume 18- Issue
15, July 21-August 03.
Rao, Rukmini (1997). “Bonded by Caste and Gender: The Feminization of Poverty in
Rural India”, Political Environments; Fall (Issue No. 5): 1-7.
Roy, Arindam (2000). “Breaking the Shackles: Kol Tribal Labourers”, Economic and Political Weekly, Feb. 5.