Women in India’s informal sector have long faced a double burden of invisibility and exploitation. They work without contracts, earn below minimum wage, and often have no recourse when denied basic rights. But recent judicial interventions are beginning to reshape this landscape. Through landmark rulings that recognize the economic value of unpaid domestic work and extend protections to informal workers, Indian courts are building a framework that could transform the lives of millions of women working outside the formal economy.
Table of Contents
Recognizing the economic value of domestic work
A 2021 Supreme Court judgment in Kirti v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. marked a watershed moment for recognizing women’s unpaid labor. The case centered on compensation for a deceased homemaker in a motor accident case. Rather than treating household work as economically insignificant, the Court established that a homemaker’s contributions have measurable financial value and must be compensated accordingly.
Justice N.V. Ramana’s judgment drew attention to startling statistics. According to the 2011 Census, nearly 160 million Indian women identified household work as their main occupation, compared to just 5.8 million men. The National Statistical Office’s Time Use survey revealed that women spend approximately 299 minutes daily on unpaid domestic services, while men spend only 97 minutes. This means women devote nearly 17% of their day to unpaid household labor, compared to less than 2% for men.
The Supreme Court ruled that when calculating compensation, courts must consider a homemaker’s notional income and apply future prospects to this amount. This approach negates the notion that homemakers do not “work” or add economic value to households. By establishing that women working at home deserve the same compensation standards as formal sector workers, the judgment validated decades of feminist arguments about unpaid care work.
Extending rights to female informal workers
Beyond recognizing domestic labor, Indian courts have gradually extended protections to women in various informal roles. The judiciary has interpreted constitutional provisions broadly to ensure that the principle of equal pay for equal work applies across all sectors, regardless of formalization status.
The Equal Remuneration Act of 1976 mandates equal pay for male and female workers undertaking the same work or work of a similar nature. While enforcement remains weak, judicial interpretations have reinforced that this protection extends to informal workers. Courts have consistently held that temporary workers performing similar duties as permanent employees are entitled to equal wages, establishing a precedent that applies to informal arrangements.
Several Supreme Court rulings have emphasized that the right to livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution encompasses fair wages and working conditions. In cases involving construction workers, domestic workers, and other informal sectors, courts have held that paying less than minimum wage constitutes forced labor under Article 23 of the Constitution, which prohibits human trafficking and forced labor.
Challenges in implementation
Despite these progressive judgments, significant gaps remain between legal recognition and ground reality. Women in the informal sector often lack awareness of their rights, making them vulnerable to exploitation. The absence of written contracts, irregular employment, and fear of losing work prevent many women from asserting legal protections.
The Unorganized Workers’ Social Security Act of 2008 aimed to provide social security benefits to informal workers, but its implementation has been inconsistent. Many women working from home in garment manufacturing, handicrafts, and food processing remain excluded from labor law protections. Over 80% of urban women are engaged in informal employment where legal protections rarely reach, as most frameworks assume formal sector employment.
Judicial recognition transforms policy discourse
The impact of judicial rulings extends beyond individual cases to influence broader policy frameworks. When courts validate the economic contributions of informal workers, they create pressure on legislative and executive branches to formalize protections.
The Supreme Court’s recent directive in Ajay Malik v. State of Uttarakhand (January 2025) exemplifies this approach. While hearing a case involving trafficking of a domestic worker, the Court observed that millions of domestic workers remain vulnerable to exploitation due to the absence of comprehensive legal protection. The judgment directed the Union Government to constitute an Expert Committee to examine the feasibility of incorporating domestic workers under existing labor laws and establishing frameworks to ensure fair wages and social security.
This directive reflects the doctrine of parens patriae, where courts assume responsibility for protecting vulnerable populations when legislative action is inadequate. The Court noted that despite multiple legislative attempts since 1959, no comprehensive law protecting domestic workers has been enacted. By creating judicial pressure for legislative reform, the Court is attempting to bridge the gap between constitutional promises and lived realities.
Aligning with international standards
Indian courts have increasingly referenced international labor standards to strengthen their arguments for worker protection. The ILO Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189) sets guidelines for fair labor practices, and Indian judges have cited it to support demands for domestic worker rights.
Similarly, the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which India has ratified, includes provisions on eliminating discrimination in employment. Courts have used these international commitments to argue that recognizing the economic value of women’s unpaid work is not merely a matter of compensation law but a fundamental requirement of gender justice.
Long-term implications for social change
Judicial activism around informal sector women’s rights has set several precedents with potential for broader transformation. By establishing that unpaid domestic work has economic value, courts have challenged deeply rooted cultural assumptions about women’s roles. This recognition matters not just for compensation calculations but for how society values care work.
The rulings are gradually influencing policy design. Several state governments have begun considering minimum wage protections for domestic workers, partly in response to judicial observations about the legal vacuum. The Supreme Court’s directive to create an Expert Committee could lead to comprehensive legislation that brings millions of informal workers under labor law protection.
Shifting social attitudes
Beyond formal policy, judicial recognition of women’s unpaid labor contributes to changing social perceptions. When the highest court in the country states that a homemaker’s work equals that of an office worker, it validates what women have always known but society has consistently devalued. This validation has ripple effects in families, communities, and workplaces.
However, some activists remain skeptical of relying too heavily on judicial intervention. They argue that sustained grassroots organizing and legislative action are ultimately more effective than court-ordered reforms. The concern is that judicial activism can substitute for democratic mobilization rather than complement it.
The path forward
For judicial interventions to translate into meaningful change, several elements must come together. First, awareness campaigns must inform women workers about their rights under existing laws and court rulings. Second, enforcement mechanisms need strengthening, as many progressive laws remain poorly implemented. Third, organizing efforts by trade unions and civil society groups must continue to build collective power among informal workers.
The judiciary’s role is perhaps most powerful when it works in tandem with social movements and legislative reform. Courts can establish principles, create visibility for marginalized groups, and apply pressure on other branches of government. But sustained change requires that women workers themselves organize, demand their rights, and hold institutions accountable.
Recent judicial rulings represent significant steps toward recognizing women’s economic contributions and extending labor protections to the informal sector. Whether these legal victories translate into real improvements in women’s lives depends on continued advocacy, stronger enforcement, and the willingness of policymakers to implement court-mandated reforms. The foundation has been laid, but the work of building a truly inclusive labor framework is far from complete.
What do you think? Can judicial intervention alone drive meaningful change for women in the informal sector, or does transformation require a combination of legal action, grassroots organizing, and policy reform? How can we ensure that court rulings translate into tangible improvements in women’s working conditions and social security?
References
- https://vidhinama.com/case-analysis-kirti-v-oriental-insurance-co-ltd-2021-2-scc-166/
- https://www.mondaq.com/india/employee-benefits-compensation/1028860/the-calculation-of-compensation-in-the-case-of-non-earning-deceaseds-kirti-v-oriental-insurance
- https://leglobal.law/countries/india/employment-law/employment-law-overview-india/05-pay-equity-laws/
- https://ijarsct.co.in/Paper23096.pdf
- https://cjp.org.in/supreme-court-pushes-for-domestic-workers-rights/
- https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220388.2018.1451631
Leave a Reply