Article 24

During British colonial rule and even after independence, poor children often worked long hours in factories, mines, and other unsafe conditions instead of going to school. This harmed their health, growth, and education. The framers of the Constitution included Article 24 as a Fundamental Right to protect children from exploitation and dangerous labor, reflecting the belief that childhood should be spent learning and growing safely, not laboring in hazardous industries.

The Supreme Court has read Article 24 together with other constitutional provisions on child welfare and education. In M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu (1996), the Court addressed child labor in hazardous industries like matchbox and fireworks factories, directing the government to identify hazardous occupations, rehabilitate child laborers, and ensure compulsory education. Courts have generally treated Article 24 as part of a broader constitutional scheme (along with Articles 21, 21A, and 39(e)-(f)) aimed at protecting children from exploitation and ensuring their healthy development.

• Myth: Article 24 bans all child labor everywhere, including light household chores or family businesses.
  Fact: Article 24 specifically prohibits employment of children under 14 in factories, mines, and other hazardous work—it does not address all forms of child labor, which are separately regulated by other laws like the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act.
• Myth: This Article alone stops all child labor in practice.
  Fact: While Article 24 sets the constitutional prohibition, courts have noted that effective enforcement also requires supporting laws, inspections, and rehabilitation programs, as seen in cases like M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu.