This week’s faculty seminar featured presentation by Jai Chander Brunner, Assistant Professor of Law, NLSIU on ‘Confused Constitutional Morality: Evaluating the Supreme Court’s Equality Doctrine in a post-Anuj Garg Era.’

Abstract

During the hearings in the Sabarimala review matter, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta questioned how Navtej Johar could have struck down Section 377 IPC on the basis of constitutional morality.

Tushar Mehta reasoned that constitutional morality is not defined by the Constitution, leaving judges with vast discretion to give it any meaning. The concept is vague. Writing in 2023, Aparna Chandra foreshadowed that judicially evolved concepts such as constitutional morality and transformative constitutionalism were underspecified, and formed an unsound basis for the Court’s progressive judgments in cases such as Navtej Johar and Joseph Shine. Chandra cautioned that the Court had neither precisely defined these concepts nor articulated a method for defining these concepts. They are excessively open-textured and can be misused to serve unconstitutional ends. Though it is true that the Court has yet to specify the general boundaries of constitutional morality and transformative constitutionalism in all cases, this paper contends that they have acquired a specific usage in gender and sex equality cases — in particular, in cases where a law disadvantages a woman or a sexual and gender minority (“WSGM”).

Examining judgments that develop Anuj Garg, this paper reveals how the Court has referred to constitutional morality to invoke a higher degree of scrutiny. The Court has established a coherent method for invoking constitutional morality and transformative constitutionalism in a relatively consistent manner in cases where the impugned law disadvantages WSGM claimant groups: if the State justifies an exclusionary statute on the basis of popular morality, then the Court will lower the degree of deference to the State, even as far as reversing the presumption of constitutionality.

Photo gallery

The JSW Centre for the Future of Law at NLSIU is organising a talk and discussion on the topic, ‘Two Facets of AI and Law: Creativity and Privacy,’ by Advocate Srinath Sridevan, Senior Advocate practising before the Madras High Court and the Founding Partner of HSB Partners.

• Day & date: Saturday, May 2, 2026
• Time: 3:00 – 4:00 PM
• Venue: Conference Hall, National Law School of India University (NLSIU) Campus 

The talk is open to the public with mandatory registration here.

About the Speaker

Advocate Srinath Sridevan is a Senior Advocate practising before the Madras High Court and is the Founding Partner of HSB Partners, a leading full-service law firm in Chennai. With over two decades at the Bar, he is widely recognised for his expertise in commercial litigation, arbitration, insolvency, and corporate law.

A sixth-generation lawyer, Srinath combines deep legal tradition with a global outlook. He graduated with a gold medal in law from Madras University and went on to pursue an LL.M. from New York University, later working with international firms such as Allen & Overy in London before returning to India to establish his practice.

Beyond litigation, he is a thought leader in the intersection of law, technology, and society. He has written and spoken extensively on artificial intelligence (AI), large language models (LLMs), and their implications for legal practice and adjudication. His work and talks often explore how technology can enhance efficiency while preserving the core principles of judicial reasoning and fairness, a question that is increasingly relevant as courts cautiously experiment with AI-assisted processes.

Srinath is also deeply committed to public interest and access to justice, having worked on impactful litigation, including efforts to improve conditions for manual scavengers through collaboration with civil society groups.

A frequent speaker and mentor, he brings to his talks a rare combination of courtroom experience, academic insight, and forward-looking engagement with legal technology, making him a compelling voice on the future of AI and the law.

The JSW Centre for the Future of Law at NLSIU is organising a talk and discussion on the topic, “Content Moderation – From Social Media Platforms to AI Chatbots: What is the Legal and Technological Framework?” by Julia Hörnle, Professor of Internet Law at Queen Mary, University of London.

• Day & date: Monday, April 27, 2026
• Time: 2:00 – 3:00 PM
• Venue: Allen and Overy Hall, National Law School of India University (NLSIU) Campus 

The Talk is open to the public with mandatory registration here.

About the Speaker

Julia Hörnle, is Professor of Internet Law at Queen Mary, University of London. She has held the Chair of Internet Law at the Centre for Commercial Law Studies at Queen Mary, University of London since 2013.

Her research areas are Cyberspace Law & Digital Rights, Internet Regulation, Jurisdiction of States Online and Online Dispute Resolution. She examines from a critical-analytical perspective the law related to the internet, cloud computing, social media and artificial intelligence. Her recent research focusses on the regulation of social media, the liability of intermediaries for user-generated content, and the use of artificial intelligence for content moderation online.

She has held visiting research and teaching positions at the at the Max Planck Institute for International and Comparative Criminal Law, at the Institute for Telecommunications and Media Law, University of Münster, at the European University Institute, Singapore Management University, the National University of Singapore and Georgetown University Washington DC.

She was educated at the University of Göttingen, the University of Leeds (1995) and the University of Hamburg, Germany (1996). She trained with the law firm of Eversheds in London and Brussels and qualified as a solicitor in 1999. She gained a University of London PhD in 2008. Read more.

 

The Centre for Labour Studies (CLS) at NLSIU is organising a day-long conference on “Addressing the Contract Labour System and Contractualisation of Workforce” as per the details below:

• Day & date: Saturday, April 11, 2026
• Time: 10:00 AM to 5:30 PM
• Venue: Conference Hall, Training Centre, NLSIU

Open to the public Register here.

The conference will bring together leading scholars, trade union representatives, lawyers, and workers to examine the rapid expansion of contract labour in India and its implications for job quality, labour rights, and social equity.

Session Details 

Session 1:  The Political Economy and Working of Contract Labour in India (10:30 to 12:30 PM)

Across the world, standard forms of employment – characterised by secure tenure, formal contracts, and access to social security – are steadily declining. In their place, non-standard forms of employment such as contractual work and gig-based work are expanding rapidly. In the Global South, including India, such forms of employment have long been widespread. However, the growing reliance on contract labour – one of the most prominent forms of non-standard employment – raises important questions about job quality and workers’ rights.

Governments and employers frequently justify the use of contract labour as essential for flexibility, productivity, and employment generation, often claiming that rigid labour laws limit firms’ ability to grow. Yet research suggests that contract employment is also used to weaken the bargaining power of permanent workers and reduce labour costs. The Economic Survey 2015–16 observed that states with more rigid labour laws actually witnessed faster growth in contract labour, challenging the claim that labour flexibility alone explains this expansion.

Evidence shows deep inequalities between regular and contract workers. A study by V.V. Giri found that contract workers in private establishments earned only 68% of the wages of regular workers, while in public employment they earned just 45%, highlighting substantial wage gaps. Contract workers also face limited access to creches, canteens, and social security, while hiring practices reflect sharp caste and gender biases, with women disproportionately employed in low-paying contractual roles such as housekeeping and sweeping.

Despite these challenges, workers and unions have resisted through strikes, protests, and legal interventions, sometimes achieving regularisation. Yet the overall trend remains concerning: the 2022-23 Enterprise Survey reports that 43% of Central Public Sector employees are contract workers, up from 19% in 2015, while the Annual Survey of Industries (2021-22) shows 40% of industrial workers are contract-based.

This panel will bring together workers, union leaders, and economists to explore the realities of contract labour in India. It will examine structural inequalities and forms of resistance, providing a critical overview that sets the stage for subsequent discussions on conditions of work, labour jurisprudence, and pathways for strengthening workers’ rights and protections.

Speakers:

• Rajesh Jospeh, Azim Premji University
• Ramadevi, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Pourakarmika Union
• Vijayakumar,  HAL Contract Workers’ Association
• Karuna Dietrich Wielenga, Azim Premji University
• Maitreyi Krishnan, AICCTU (Moderator)

Session 2: Occupational Safety, Health, and Working Conditions Code (OSH Code) and Contract Labour (12:45PM to 1:45PM)

In 2025, the Union Government notified four labour codes, consolidating and replacing a wide range of labour laws that had governed workers’ rights for over a century. Among the laws subsumed was the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, which, despite its limitations, had provided an important framework for regulating contract labour. Under the new Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions (OSH) Code, many of these protections have been significantly weakened.

The OSH Code raises the threshold for its applicability, narrows the scope of regulation, and allows the use of contract labour even in core and permanent activities. It specifically keeps out certain works from the definition of core and permanent work, and these include works performed by historically marginalized sections of society.

The OSH Code also reduces certain employer liabilities toward workers. Collectively, these changes raise serious concerns about the future of decent work, job security, and workplace protections for contract workers.

This panel will examine in detail the implications of the newly enacted OSH Code for workers, highlight its differences from the previous legal framework, and discuss its potential impact on judicial interpretations and the broader jurisprudence of labour law.

Speakers:

• Meenakshi Sundaram, CITU
• Maitreyi Krishnan, AICCTU
• Saurabh Bhattacharjee, Center for Labour Studies, NLSIU (Moderator)

Session 3: Contract Labour and the Courts: The Evolving Jurisprudence of Regularisation (2:30PM to 3: 45 PM)

For over a quarter of a century, an important part of labour’s struggle against contractualisation has unfolded in the courts, particularly before the Supreme Court and various High Courts across India. In disputes concerning both public and private employment, the judiciary has often been the final forum where workers seek recognition of their claims for regularisation.

Two landmark judgments frequently cited as restricting the rights of contract workers are Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. National Union Waterfront Workers (2001) and Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi (2006). In the first case, the Supreme Court held that contract workers do not have an automatic right to absorption into permanent employment. In the second, the Court ruled that the regularisation of ad hoc or temporary employees could amount to granting “backdoor entry” into government service, thereby significantly narrowing the scope for regularisation.

In the years since these decisions, however, courts – including the Supreme Court – have revisited and interpreted aspects of these rulings in more nuanced ways. Judgments such as Jaggo v. Union of India, Shirpal & Another v. Nagar Nigam Ghaziabad, and the recent decision in Dharam Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh have softened some of the rigid implications of earlier rulings. These decisions have carved out limited exceptions and created some space for recognising the rights of daily-wage and contractual workers.

At the same time, the legal terrain continues to evolve. A case currently pending before the Supreme Court, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation v. Krishnan Gopal, raises the important question of whether labour and industrial courts have the authority to order regularisation when there are no sanctioned posts.

This panel seeks to unpack the complex and contested jurisprudence surrounding contract labour through a discussion of key court decisions. Bringing together labour lawyers and trade union leaders, it will examine how courts currently approach demands for regularisation and what these developments mean for workers’ struggles today.

Speakers:

• Sudha Bharadwaj, Trade Unionist and Labour Lawyer, High Court of Bombay
• Muralidhara, Labour Lawyer, High Court of Karnataka
• Saurabh Bhattacharjee, Center for Labour Studies, NLSIU
• Avani Chokshi, AICCTU (Moderator)

Session 4: Contract Labour after the Labour Codes: Regulation and Path Forward (4PM to 5:30PM)

Despite the notification of the four labour codes by the Union Government, considerable ambiguity persists regarding their implementation. Many State Governments are currently in the process of formulating and notifying rules to operationalise these codes, while also considering alternative measures including passing state-specific legislation to address potential adverse impacts. This includes introducing additional legal protections for workers who may be excluded from the scope of the new framework.

Such state-level interventions are not unprecedented; under the earlier labour regime, states such as Tamil Nadu and Assam enacted laws providing for the regularization of workers after a defined period of service – protections that are not uniformly available to workers in other states across the country.

In this context, the panel aims to bring together representatives from the judiciary, trade unions, workers, and academia to reflect on the implications of the new legal framework governing contract labour and to discuss possible responses to the challenges it presents including considering the proposal to submit a bill on the regularization of employment to the Government of Karnataka. The panel will also briefly examine and deliberate on provisions in the model law on regularisation drafted for submission to the Karnataka Government.

Speakers:

• VJK Nair, CITU
• Clifton D’ Rozario, AICCTU
• Babu Mathew, AITUC (Moderator)