The jurisdiction of High Court under Article 226 is wider than Supreme Court under Article 32 because the High Court can exercise its writ jurisdiction not only for the enforcement of fundamental rights but also for enfo

Once the fundamental rights of labourers are infringed, they can approach the Supreme Court for relief under Article 32 or High Court for relief under Article 226 and if any other legal right is also infringed they can approach the High Court for relief under Article 226. In Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 802 , a social cause organisation approached the Supreme Court through a letter under Article 32 to request the Hon'ble Supreme Court to investigate the existence of inhuman conditions in certain mines where numerous persons were working as forced/bonded labourers. The Supreme Court directed and appointed two inquiry commissions to find out the true facts and circumstances as alleged by the petitioner. The Court rebuked the State government for raising a preliminary objection to stall in an inquiry by the Court into the matter in the following words: "We should have thought that if any citizen brings before the Court a complaint that a large number of peasants or workers are bonded serfs or being subjected to exploitation by a few mine lessees or contractors or employers or are being denied the benefits of social welfare laws, the State Government, which is, under our constitutional scheme, charged with the mission of bringing about a new socioeconomic order where there will be social and economic justice for every one and equality of status and opportunity for all, would welcome an inquiry by the court, so that if it is found that there are in fact bonded labourers or even if the workers are not bonded in the strict sense of the term as defined in the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 but they are made to provide forced labour or are consigned to a life of utter deprivation and degradation such a situation can be set right by the State Government." The Court held that though no fundamental right of the petitioner may be said to be infringed, yet the petitioner who complains of such violation may succeed by virtue of PIL. The court further pointed out that the jurisdiction of High Court under Article 226 is wider than Supreme Court under Article 32 because the High Court can exercise its writ jurisdiction not only for the enforcement of fundamental right but also for enforcement of any legal right.