This situation highlights a concerning gap between legislative intent and administrative execution. Your RTI application (Reg. no. 001343/2025) serves as a critical tool for accountability in a case where a worker’s livelihood—specifically the non-payment of wages—is at stake.

---

Administrative Apathy or Systemic Negligence? The Struggle for Labour Justice in Gurugram

In the rapidly expanding industrial landscape of Gurugram, the “Millennium City,” a darker reality persists beneath the surface of economic growth. Vulnerable laborers, the backbone of the industrial sector, are increasingly finding themselves at the mercy of non-compliant manpower agencies and silent administrative bodies.

The Core Issue: Wage Theft and Bureaucratic Silence

The case of Britesh Kumar Saroj, a qualified worker (BA pass) employed as a helper, serves as a poignant example of the current crisis. Despite fulfilling his duties, his wages remain unpaid by both his employer and the manpower supplier agency. When citizens like Yogi M. P. Singh intervene to seek justice via official grievance portals, they are met with a wall of administrative opacity.

Grievance GOVHY/E/2024/0009643 was summarily closed with a cryptic and dismissive remark: “Demand/not maintainable.”

The Failure of Redressal Mechanisms

When the Office of the Labour Commissioner or the local police ignore these grievances, it creates a “justice vacuum.” By labeling a clear case of unpaid wages as “not maintainable,” the authorities effectively:

• Normalize Exploitation: Allowing companies to withhold salaries without fear of legal repercussions.
• Deny the “Right to Reason”: Violating a fundamental principle of administrative law which requires public authorities to justify their decisions.
• Undermine Constitutional Duties: Ignoring applications made under Article 51A, which underscores the fundamental duties of citizens to strive toward excellence and social justice.

The RTI: A Tool for Transparency

Frustrated by the dismissive response, a formal Right to Information (RTI) application was filed on January 30, 2025, against the Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal Gurugram-I. The application demands five critical points of clarity:

1. Identity: Who specifically made the “not maintainable” remark?
2. Rationale: What is the legal or factual basis for dismissing a wage-related complaint?
3. Accountability: Who were the officers responsible for investigating the initial claim?
4. Contact Information: Direct lines of communication (C.U.G. numbers) for the Deputy and Assistant Labour Commissioners.
5. Deployment: A list of active Labour Inspectors and their current posting details.

Why This Matters

The “administrative apathy” mentioned in the application is not just a procedural flaw; it is a violation of the dignity of labor. When the state fails to protect the most vulnerable from financial exploitation, it raises serious questions about the commitment of public institutions to the rule of law.

Transparency is the first step toward reform. By demanding the names and reasons behind these decisions, we move closer to a system where “labour rights” are not just words on paper, but a lived reality for every worker in Haryana.

---

Conclusion and Next Steps

The status of RTI 001343/2025 is currently “Pending.” The eyes of the public are now on the Public Information Officer (PIO) of the Labour Department, Gurugram. Within the stipulated 30-day window, the department must provide answers, or further confirm the allegations of systemic negligence.

This detail adds a critical layer to the exploitation you’ve described. When recruitment agencies use multistate advertisements and demand “caution money” (often disguised as security deposits, training fees, or uniform charges), they are often operating a sophisticated “cash-for-jobs” racket.

Under Indian labour laws and various court rulings, charging candidates money for the privilege of being recruited is generally considered an unfair labour practice.

---

The Modus Operandi: “Recruitment as a Revenue Stream”

The pattern you are highlighting is common in high-growth industrial belts like Gurugram:

• Multistate Reach: By advertising across states (like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar), agencies target migrant workers who are less likely to have local support networks or immediate access to legal recourse in Haryana.
• The “Caution Money” Trap: Agencies often claim this money is a “refundable security deposit” to ensure the worker doesn’t leave the job. In reality, once the money is paid, the agency has no incentive to protect the worker’s rights or ensure their salary is paid.
• The Double-Sided Profit: These agencies often charge both the industrial employer (for providing manpower) and the poor labourer (as “caution money”), effectively profiting from the vulnerability of the unemployed.

Legal and Administrative Red Flags

In your RTI and ongoing grievance, these points are vital because:

1. Violation of the Contract Labour Act: Under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, contractors are required to be licensed. Charging “caution money” from workers is often a violation of the conditions of that license.
2. Unpaid Wages vs. Deposits: If a company hasn’t paid Britesh Kumar Saroj his salary, and the agency is also holding “caution money,” they are essentially holding the worker’s own funds hostage while denying him earned income.
3. Criminal Intent (IPC 420): If an agency collects money through advertisements but fails to provide a stable job or pay wages, it can be treated as a criminal case of cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.

Strategies for Your Follow-Up

Since your RTI is pending, you may want to prepare a “Supplementary Submission” or a fresh complaint to the Director General of Police (DGP) Haryana and the Chief Labour Commissioner focusing specifically on this financial extortion:

• Demand a License Audit: Ask if the manpower supplier agency involved has a valid license to recruit and whether their “caution money” policy was ever approved by the Labour Department.
• Highlight the Inter-State Aspect: Since the advertisements are “multistate,” this could potentially fall under the Inter-State Migrant Workmen Act, 1979, which provides additional protections for workers recruited from outside the state.
• Social Media/Publicity: Highlighting that “multistate ads” are being used to lure and exploit poor workers can help warn others in your home district of Mirzapur and beyond.

This shifting of responsibility between the Police and the Labour Department is a classic example of “bureaucratic ping-pong,” designed to exhaust the complainant until they give up.

By telling you to file a “civil suit,” the police are attempting to de-criminalize what is clearly a case of financial fraud (the “caution money”). Meanwhile, by “procrastinating,” the Labour Department is failing its statutory duty to act as a quasi-judicial body for wage protection.

Here is a breakdown of why their stance is legally flawed and how you can counter it.

---

1. The Police Fallacy: Why it is NOT just a “Civil Suit”

The Haryana Police often label wage disputes as civil matters to avoid registering an FIR. However, the “Caution Money” element changes the legal nature of the case:

• Criminal Breach of Trust (Section 406 IPC/BNS): When a worker deposits “caution money,” it is a trust. If the agency refuses to refund it or uses it to exploit the worker, it is a criminal breach of trust.
• Cheating (Section 420 IPC/BNS): If the multistate advertisement was used to lure workers with false promises of paid employment, and then wages were withheld, the intent to deceive exists from the start. This is a cognizable criminal offense.
• Your Counter: Inform the police that while the unpaid salary has civil remedies, the extortion of caution money through deceptive advertising is a criminal act of cheating.

2. The Labour Department’s Negligence

The Office of the Labour Commissioner is not a “choice-based” service; they have a statutory obligation under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 and the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.

• The Power of the Authority: The Labour Department has the power to hear “Claims” and pass orders for the payment of wages along with compensation (up to 10 times the amount).
• Procrastination is Malfeasance: If the department refuses to entertain the matter, they are violating the “Right to Speedy Justice” (Article 21).

---

3. Strategizing Your Next Move

Since the RTI is already pending, you should use the following “Escalation Ladder” to break the deadlock:

Step A: The “Notice of Inaction” (CM Window)

Haryana has a robust CM Window (Chief Minister’s Grievance Redressal System).

• Action: Lodge a fresh complaint specifically mentioning that the Labour Department is “procrastinating” and the Police are “misdirecting the victim to civil courts” despite evidence of financial fraud (caution money).
• Key Phrase to Use: “The refusal to act constitutes a failure of the public authority to perform its statutory duty, forcing a poor labourer into expensive litigation which he cannot afford.

Step B: Complaint to the Lokayukta

If the Labour Department continues to ignore the case, you can file a complaint with the Haryana Lokayukta.

• This body investigates “administrative apathy” and “corruption” (which includes willful negligence of duty).

Step C: Legal Notice for “Mandamus”

You can have a lawyer (or through a legal aid clinic) send a formal legal notice to the Labour Commissioner.

• The notice should state that if they do not process the grievance within 15 days, you will file a Writ of Mandamus in the Punjab & Haryana High Court to compel them to perform their duty.

---

Update to the Blog Post (Addition)

“The Civil Suit Trap:” Authorities in Haryana are increasingly telling poor workers to ‘file a civil suit.’ This is a cruel irony. A helper earning minimum wage cannot afford a civil lawyer or wait 5 years for a decree. By denying administrative relief, the state is effectively denying justice altogether.

To break the cycle of “administrative apathy” you are facing in Gurugram, you need to bypass the local desk-level officers who are stalling your case and reach the higher authorities directly.

Based on current records for 2025, here are the official contact details and portals you can use to escalate the exploitation of Britesh Kumar Saroj and the “caution money” fraud.

---

1. Police Authority (To challenge the “Civil Suit” claim)

Since the agency collected “caution money” under potentially false pretenses, it is a criminal matter of cheating. Address your complaint to the Commissioner of Police, Gurugram.

Designation	Name	Mobile / Phone	Email
Commissioner of Police	Sh. Vikas Arora, IPS	9999981801	cp.ggn@hry.nic.in
Joint Commissioner	Smt. Sangeeta Kalia, IPS	9999981802	jtcp.ggn@hry.nic.in
DCP Headquarters	Sh. Arpit Jain, IPS	9999981803	dcp.hqggn@hry.nic.in

• Website: haryanapolice.gov.in

---

2. Labour Department (To address “Procrastination”)

If the local Assistant Labour Commissioner (ALC) is not entertaining the grievance, escalate to the Head Office in Panchkula and the Divisional Commissioner.

• Labour Commissioner (Haryana):
  • Phone (Head Office): 0172-2701373
  • Toll-Free (Shramik Sahayata): 1800-180-4818
  • Email: labourcommissioner@hry.nic.in
• Divisional Commissioner (Gurugram):
  • Phone: 0124-2324033
  • Email: commgrg@hry.nic.in
• Official Portal: hrylabour.gov.in

---

3. Direct Escalation Portals (Most Effective)

Since you are facing a “ping-pong” effect between departments, use these centralized monitoring systems. Grievances here cannot be closed without a valid reason that satisfies a higher-level monitor.

• CM Window (Chief Minister’s Grievance Cell):
  • Link: cmharyanacell.nic.in
  • Purpose: Use this to report the “procrastination” of the Labour Department. It is monitored directly by the CM’s office.
• CPGRAMS (Central Government Portal):
  • Link: pgportal.gov.in
  • Purpose: Since this involves “multistate advertisements,” filing a grievance here forces the state to report back to the Central Government.
• Haryana Lokayukta (For Administrative Malpractice):
  • Address: Room No 232, 2nd Floor, New Secretariat, Sector-17, Chandigarh.
  • Purpose: File a formal complaint against the specific officers who are willfully neglecting their duty to protect labor rights.

---

Recommendation for your next email:

When you write to the Commissioner of Police, use this subject line to ensure it isn’t dismissed as a civil case:

“SUBJECT: Formal Complaint for Criminal Breach of Trust (Section 406 IPC) and Cheating (Section 420 IPC) regarding illegal collection of ‘Caution Money’ and Wage Theft.”

Would you like me to draft a concise “Summary of Facts” that you can attach to these emails to ensure the officers understand the criminal nature of the case immediately?