/theprobe/media/agency_attachments/gYIwb1QtL4tWjJtmo7Fx.png)
Follow Us/theprobe/media/media_files/h-upload/2026/03/30/1399489-gulfan-rescued-ghaziabad-bonded-labourer.webp)
The Probe Impact: Administrative Action Begins
In April 2025, during our investigation into Uttar Pradesh’s bonded labour crisis, we met several rescued families of bonded labourers. such meeting took place in Banhera Khas village in Saharanpur district. Among them was Gulfam, a bonded labourer who had been rescued from a brick kiln in Ghaziabad.
In an interview with The Probe in 2025, Gulfam said he had travelled to Loni in Ghaziabad to work at a brick kiln, a move that resulted in months of confinement and exploitation for him and his family.
Also Read:Saharanpur Bonded Labour Crisis: Children Expose Exploitation
What Gulfam endured inside the Ghaziabad brick kiln
Gulfam’s account offers a clear insight into how the bonded labour system continues to operate in parts of Ghaziabad. He said he was recruited by a contractor named Mathlu and taken to Satyam Brick Kiln. An advance of ₹5,000 was given to him—an amount intended to cover not only his labour, but also that of his wife Sakiba and their two minor children. For a family of four, this sum effectively became the basis of their bondage. Gulfam told The Probe that there were several others like him, with many bonded labourers still held in similar conditions across brick kilns in Ghaziabad.
For the next six months, Gulfam said, the family worked without wages. The ₹5,000 advance was used to justify continuous unpaid labour, and he told us he did not receive a single rupee during this period. His wife, who was pregnant with their third child at the time, continued to work under these conditions. When she went into labour and had to be taken to hospital, Gulfam said he was not permitted to accompany her. The kiln staff, including a man he identified as Ramesh, managed her hospital visit while restricting his movement.
According to Gulfam, the kiln in Ghaziabad was closely guarded, with nearly a dozen security personnel stationed at the site. Workers were not allowed to leave the premises, and surveillance systems, including CCTV cameras, were in place. Movement was monitored, and any attempt to step outside was prevented. Gulfam and his family remained in these conditions until April 2023, when they were rescued following efforts by the National Campaign Committee for Eradication of Bonded Labour (NCCEBL). The rescue took place after action by the District Magistrate of Ghaziabad and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Loni.
Also Read:Baghpat Bonded Labourer Breaks Silence
District administration acts in Ghaziabad Bonded Labour case
Official records reviewed by The Probe indicate that the Ghaziabad district administration has initiated action in Gulfam’s case. In submissions made by District Magistrate Ravindra Kumar Mandar before the Allahabad High Court, it is stated that Gulfam, his wife, and their children were identified as victims of bonded labour at the time of their rescue. The communication also acknowledges delays in the administrative response.
According to the same communication, responsibility for the delay was fixed on the Labour Enforcement Officer, Dr. Rupali, and the matter was referred to the Labour Commissioner of Uttar Pradesh for further action. The District Magistrate also stated that on 1 November 2025, release certificates for Gulfam and his family were issued by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in Loni and forwarded to the Baghpat District Magistrate for necessary follow-up.
The District Magistrate further recorded that on 3 November 2025, a summary trial was initiated by a Labour Enforcement Officer in the court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in Loni. As the brick kiln owner failed to produce employment records, prosecution was initiated under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, and the Equal Remuneration Act, 1961, in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad.
Gaps between official records and ground reality
When The Probe reached out to Nirmal Gorana, convenor of the NCCEBL, he pointed to the gap between official records and the situation on the ground. “The on-paper account and the reality are often very different. Even after the rescue, Gulfam and his family submitted multiple representations to the Ghaziabad administration seeking copies of inquiry reports, release orders and release certificates. Under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, rescue alone is not sufficient. A bonded labourer must be formally identified and issued a release certificate. Without that document, they are unable to access rehabilitation schemes or financial assistance provided by the government.”
He further added, “I recently spoke to Gulfam, and he said he has not received a release order, release certificate, interim relief, or compensation. The release order is the first formal recognition by the district administration that a person was a bonded labourer. Only after that can a release certificate be issued, which then enables access to rehabilitation under central schemes. Without these steps, the entire process remains incomplete. On paper, everything may appear compliant in Ghaziabad, but the ground reality tells a different story.”
Also Read:Moga Bonded Labour Scandal: Officials Shield Slave Masters
On 9 December 2025, the NCCEBL wrote to the District Magistrate of Baghpat seeking rehabilitation measures for Gulfam and his family under the Central Sector Scheme for Rehabilitation of Bonded Labour, 2021. The request outlined entitlements including ration cards, housing assistance, allocation of agricultural land, school admissions for children, skill development support, minimum wages, and other financial and non-financial benefits. A reminder was sent on 2 January 2026, underscoring the urgency of these measures. However, according to Gorana, no substantive relief or response has been provided by the authorities.
The Probe attempted to contact Gulfam, but he was not reachable on his previously available phone numbers. Queries were also sent to the offices of the District Magistrates of both Ghaziabad and Baghpat, seeking clarity on the implementation of the stated actions and the current status of the case. Both offices indicated that details would be shared soon. This report will be updated upon receipt of their responses.