Royal Commission on Labour in India: Report(1929)||
Many of these proposals involve an addition to the work of the. factory inspectorate. Proposals follow in respect of docks and other classes of factories which will enlarge the field for which they are responsible. On the other hand, the adoption of some of our proposals, and a particular those which are made regarding the inspection of seasonal factories, should set free a considerable part of the time of the permanent inspectors for duties in connection with perennial factories. The addition of medical inspectors and of women inspectors should be of substantial assistance, in spite of the fact that a considerable part of the work of those officers will be work which at present is necessarily left largely undone In advising regarding the proper strength of the staff, we must observe that it is difficult to fix an upper limit beyond which the appointment of extra inspectors would be useless. There is a wide scope for further work, if inspectors were available to do it, and it is certain that no province has reached the limit at which additional inspectors could not be employed I with valuable results. At the same time we believe that, provided medical and women inspectors are appointed as recommended, it might be possible, except in one or two provinces, to avoid the necessity of appointing any additional fully qualified inspectors at the present time. This view is dependent on the adoption and successful working of the system advocated later for the inspection of seasonal factories and those factories which are at present unregulated. In the United Provinces, boiler inspection should be undertaken by a separate staff and we recommend that in future these two classes of inspection should invariably be distinct. Delhi and Ajmer-Menvara are at present under the charge of the Inspector for the Punjab, who is also responsible for the North-West Frontier Province. This is too large an area for adequate supervision by one officer, and we accordingly recommend the separation of Ajmer-Merwara and Delhi and the appointment of a separate officer for this area. Elsewhere, and particularly in Burma and Bihar and Orissa, there is room for the appointment of Assistant Inspectors of the type indicated above. We must, however, emphasise the fact that our conclusions on this question are based on the assumption that the inspectorate will be kept up to the sanctioned strength throughout the year.
It has happened in the past in more than one province that inspectors have been allowed to go on leave, possibly for the greater part of the year, without any suitable appointment being made in their place. In no province is the present staff sufficiently strong to permit of this being done, even under existing conditions. Leave vacancies would be best filled by promoting Assistant Inspectors, if they are competent, to officiate in the higher grade and appointing probationary officers in their place. If no Assistant Inspector is available, the work cannot be carried on without a temporary Inspector, and the fact that these will ordinarily be difficult to obtain furnishes an additional ground for the general appointment of Assistant Inspectors.