The Supreme Court on Thursday, January 29, 2026, refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a law to enforce minimum wages for domestic workers across India. The court said it cannot issue an order directing the Centre and States to consider changing existing laws. Chief Justice Surya Kant criticized trade unions, saying, "All traditional industries in the country, all because of these ‘jhanda’ unions have been closed... These trade union leaders are largely responsible for stopping industrial growth in the country." He added that while exploitation exists, "there are means to address exploitation" through awareness and reforms. A Bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi acknowledged the tough situation of millions of domestic workers but said the judiciary cannot make laws. The Bench ruled, "No enforceable decree or order can be passed unless the legislature is asked to enact a suitable law. Such a direction we are afraid ought not to be issued by this court." The court asked petitioners, including the domestic workers’ union Penn Thozhilalargal Sangam, to continue raising awareness and work with States and the Union for solutions. "We are hopeful that a suitable mechanism shall be deployed for their help and to prevent exploitation," the Bench noted. Senior advocate Raju Ramachandran, representing the petitioners, said domestic workers, mostly women, are vulnerable with little legal protection. He highlighted that countries like Singapore have strong laws ensuring minimum wages and leave for domestic workers. The CJI expressed concerns over judicial overreach and warned, "Once minimum wages are fixed, people may refuse to hire. Every household will be dragged into litigation." He added trade union models have not always helped industries, citing sugarcane unions shutting down workplaces. Justice Bagchi pointed out that domestic workers are already covered by the Unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act, providing some safety nets. The Bench also criticized employment agencies for worker exploitation. When asked to declare that non-payment of minimum wages violates constitutional rights, the court replied such declarations are "lip service" without laws in place. Ramachandran noted that while some States notify minimum wages for domestic workers, many do not, despite uniform employment nature countrywide. The court also referred to a 2025 judgment recognizing domestic workers' plight but noting no successful law has yet been passed. The Supreme Court finally disposed of the PIL but encouraged ongoing advocacy and State action on the issue.