Legal and judicial context

A long battle against manual scavenging India has had laws and judicial pronouncements aimed at eradicating manual scavenging for decades. The Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993 was the first attempt to criminalize manual scavenging, but it was poorly implemented. Subsequently, the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 expanded the definition of manual scavenging and mandated rehabilitation measures, including cash assistance, housing, education, and skill development. Despite these laws, the practice persisted, leading to significant judicial intervention.

Key Supreme Court decisions

Safai Karamchari Andolan v. Union of India (2014):

• The Supreme Court observed that manual scavenging was a clear violation of Articles 17, 21 of the Constitution and directed its complete eradication.
• The Court acknowledged that despite the enactment of the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993, the practice continued unchecked for two decades.
• Due to judicial intervention, the Government enacted the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, which provided a stronger legal framework for abolition and rehabilitation.
• The Court emphasised that manual scavengers, primarily from Dalit communities, were subjected to extreme social discrimination and inhuman treatment, which was a form of untouchability prohibited under Article 17.
• The judgment stressed the international obligations of India under conventions like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the Convention on Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), reinforcing the need for India to abolish the practice.
• It directed the railway authorities to adopt a time-bound strategy to end manual scavenging along railway tracks.
• The ruling further ordered the identification of families of all individuals who had died in sewer-related work since 1993 and provided for compensation of ₹10 lakh per death.
• The Court concluded that while judicial monitoring was not required, all state governments and local bodies bore the responsibility of ensuring complete eradication and taking punitive action against defaulters.

The judgment may be read here:

Dr. Balram Singh v. Union of India (2023):

• The Supreme Court condemned the persistent violation of the 2013 Act and noted that despite legal prohibitions, manual scavenging continued unabated in various parts of the country.
• The Court directed the Union of India and states to ensure strict enforcement of the 2013 Act, including a comprehensive, nationwide survey to identify manual scavengers.

“The statutory scheme cannot be undermined through an interpretation that would leave the implementation of the 2013 Act solely with the local bodies, without any guidance from the Governments – State and Central. In other words, the salutary commitment made by the 2013 Act must be fulfilled by the local bodies in accordance with a policy-framework laid down by the Central or State Government.” (Para 53)

• It emphasized the failure of state and district-level monitoring committees, mandating their immediate reconstitution and active oversight.

“During the course of proceedings, on May 2, 2023, it was brought to notice of this court about irregular functioning of the Central Monitoring Committee envisaged under the Act of 2013.” (Para 8)

• The Court expressed deep concern over continuous sewer deaths, ruling that hazardous manual sewer entry amounts to forced labour under Article 23 of the Constitution.

“Drawing from the above principles, it can be held that where minimum protective gear and cleaning devices are not provided to hazardous workers, the employment of hazardous workers amounts to forced labour and is thus prohibited under the Constitution.” (Para 90)

• The Court ordered ₹10 lakh compensation per sewer death, with state authorities held directly accountable for compliance.
• It stressed the need for better mechanization and technological interventions, directing municipal bodies to replace manual scavenging with mechanized solutions.

“It was noted that many countries have replaced the term “manholes” emphasizing the significance of change in language…… shortcomings in schemes like Swachh Bharat Mission and NAMASTE as it is only limited to urban local bodies, second it remains silent on mechanization technology deployed by the state authorities.” (Para 25)

• It highlighted discrepancies in official data, questioning the gross underreporting of manual scavengers and deaths, and called for transparency and accountability inreporting mechanisms.

“The appropriate government (i.e., the Union, State or Union Territories) shall devise a suitable mechanism to ensure accountability, especially wherever sewer deaths occur in the course of contractual or “outsourced” work. This accountability shall be in the form of cancellation of contract, forthwith, and imposition of monetary liability, aimed at deterring the practice” (Para 96)

• The Court directed urban local bodies and railways to phase out manual scavenging completely within a fixed timeframe, ensuring full mechanization of sewer cleaning operations.

“The Union should take appropriate measures and frame policies, and issue directions, to all statutory bodies, including corporations, railways, cantonments, as well as agencies under its control, to ensure that manual sewer cleaning is completely eradicated in a phased manner” (Para 96)

• It ruled that states failing to comply with rehabilitation measures would be held in contempt of court, with potential financial penalties imposed for non-compliance.

“The liberative nature of the statute coupled with the object of Article 17 and 23 require entitlements to be given to the families of those persons who died while working in sewers or septic tanks. This is also because the entire family would be rendered without a bread-winner. The economic and social status of the already downtrodden and oppressed family would dwindle further. The dignity of the individual, guaranteed by law under Article 21, must be ensured through rehabilitative processes.” (Para 92)

The judgment may be read here:

Despite these laws and judgments, the ground reality remained unchanged. The latest SC ruling is an acknowledgment of this persistent failure.

Key directives of the 2025 Supreme court order the January 2025 ruling directed that

• All manual sewer cleaning and manual scavenging must stop immediately in the six metro cities: Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata, Bengaluru, and Hyderabad.
• Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) of each city must file affidavits before the Supreme Court by February 13, 2025, detailing how they have implemented the ban.

The order may be read here:

Manual scavenging: A never-ending saga in India

Despite multiple judicial interventions, manual scavenging continues to persist due to deep-rooted socio-economic inequalities, caste-based discrimination, and administrative apathy. According to Garima Chawla’s research in The Grim Reality of Manual Scavenging in India: A Human Rights Perspective, published in the Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development (2024), manual scavengers continue to face grave health hazards and socio-economic hardships due to inadequate rehabilitation efforts and the failure of enforcement mechanisms.

The study highlights:

The overwhelming majority of manual scavengers belong to Dalit communities and are subjected to systemic caste-based discrimination.

• Many state governments underreport the prevalence of manual scavenging to avoid accountability and liability.
• Lack of mechanization in sanitation work continues to force marginalized workers into life-threatening conditions.
• Rehabilitation programs fail due to insufficient financial support and lack of alternative livelihood opportunities.
• There is an urgent need for stronger legal enforcement, public awareness campaigns, and rehabilitation efforts to ensure justice and dignity for affected communities.

(The legal research team of CJP consists of lawyers and interns; this primer has been worked on by Shailendar Karthikeyan)

Related:

Breaking the cruel cycle of oppression: one more judgment against manual scavenging in India

Manual scavenging: Hate crime with caste discrimination at its root, Indian Railways an offender

How courts have expanded jurisprudence for Manual Scavengers

The Manual Scavengers Act: Jurisprudence so far

Manual scavenger deaths: How effective is the law in preventing them?

Death down the drain

The post India’s struggle to end manual scavenging continues appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Following Sridhar’s death, his father, Kannaiyan, filed a claim under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, seeking justice and financial relief. However, the case was fraught with procedural hurdles, including repeated dismissals for default due to Kannaiyan’s inability to attend hearings—a situation exacerbated by his impoverished and fragile circumstances. The protracted litigation highlighted the judiciary’s struggle to balance procedural formalities with substantive justice in cases involving vulnerable communities.

After Kannaiyan’s death, his legal representatives persisted with the claim, filing the present writ petition to challenge the rigid application of procedural norms by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour. The case not only called for compensation for Sridhar’s family but also raised critical questions about the role of state authorities and contractors in perpetuating exploitative labour practices. By situating this case within the broader context of labour rights and human dignity, the Court’s timely and decisive intervention acted as a crucial measure to address systemic failings and restore accountability within institutional frameworks.

Issues involved

1. Whether the repeated dismissals for default by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour were justified under labour welfare legislation?
2. Whether the family of the deceased is entitled to compensation despite procedural lapses?

Observations made by the court

1. The Court unequivocally held that the continued practice of manual scavenging violates fundamental human rights and directly contravenes existing statutory provisions, such as the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993.

“This case does not need any elaborate reasoning. Suffice it to state that one of our fellow human beings died of manual scavenging. This violates all tenants of human rights. Even at the relevant time, the action of the manual scavenging of the sewer stood prohibited by The Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act”

(Paragraph 8 of the judgment)

2. The court observed that the death of Sridhar exemplified systemic neglect by both the state authorities and contractors, who failed to ensure basic safety measures. The Court highlighted the absolute liability of the respondents to compensate the victim’s family without procedural hurdles.

“there can be no doubt whatsoever that the said Sridhar died while he was employed as a manual scavenger when he was sent inside the underground sewer without any protective gear”

(Paragraph 2 of the judgment)

3. The Court criticised the respondents for their lack of proactive measures and emphasized that labour welfare laws demand a liberal interpretation to prevent procedural technicalities from defeating substantive justice.

“Even when a petition is filed at least at that stage, immediately the authorities should have agreed to pay the compensation. The Labour Commissioner before whom the petition was pending ought to be alive to the facts situation. Even if the petitioner does not appear, proactive steps should have been taken to summon the petitioner and compensation ought to have been paid. It was extremely unfair on the part of all the respondents” (Paragraph 9 of the judgment)

4. Citing Safai Karamchari Andolan v. Union of India (2014 11 SCC 224), the Court reiterated that compensation of ₹10,00,000 is mandatory in cases of sewer deaths. It further relied on Dr. Balram Singh v. Union of India (2023 INSC 950) to acknowledge the revised compensation of ₹30,00,000 for incidents occurring post-1993.

“The matter is no longer res integra. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Safai Karamchari Andolon and Others -Vs- Union of India (2014 11 SCC 224)2 has mandated grant of a sum of Rs. 10 Lakhs to the family of the person who dies in sewer cleaning”

(Paragraph 8 of the judgment)

Guidelines issued

1. The impugned order dismissing the condonation of delay application was quashed.
2. Compensation of ₹10,00,000 was awarded as follows:
   • ₹3,30,000 to Jaya.
   • ₹3,40,000 to Venda.
   • ₹3,30,000 to minor dependents Mohan and Vijaykumar, via their guardian Venda.
3. The respondents were directed to disburse the compensation within six weeks and issue an apology letter acknowledging societal failures.
4. The Court observed that negligence by the authorities amounted to a systemic failure to prevent manual scavenging deaths.

Significance of the judgment

This judgment is a critical intervention in the ongoing battle against manual scavenging, a practice deeply entrenched in caste-based discrimination and systemic neglect. As Dr. B.R. Ambedkar poignantly remarked, “In India, a man is not a scavenger because of his work. He is a scavenger because of his birth irrespective of the question whether he does scavenging or not.” The decision of the Court not only addresses the immediate injustice faced by the family of Sridhar but also emphasizes the urgent need to dismantle structural inequalities that perpetuate this practice. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, in her statement on January 31, 2013, recognized manual scavenging as a “self-perpetuating cycle of stigma and untouchability,” calling it a “deeply unhealthy, unsavoury, and undignified job forced upon people because of their caste.” This judgment reinforces that such dehumanizing labour has no place in a modern democracy and highlights the failure to implement existing laws like the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013.

Drawing on the Human Rights Watch report and the UN’s acknowledgment of India’s efforts, the judgment reflects the judiciary’s proactive role in holding state and local authorities accountable. The Court’s mandate for compensation, coupled with an apology, signals a broader responsibility to restore dignity and justice for marginalized communities. By citing landmark cases such as Safai Karamchari Andolan v. Union of India (2014) and Dr. Balram Singh v. Union of India (2023), the judgment aligns itself with the global movement to eradicate manual scavenging and rehabilitate those subjected to it. This judgment stands as a clarion call for society and the state to ensure strict enforcement of laws, provide sustainable alternatives, and break the chains of caste oppression that continue to define and degrade the lives of millions in India.

The Judgment in this case, W.P.No.2339 of 2010, delivered D. Bharatha Chakravarthy J of Madras High Court on December 17, 2024 may be read here

(The legal research team of CJP consists of lawyers and interns; this primer has been worked on by Shailendar Karthikeyan)

Related:

Manual scavenging: Hate crime with caste discrimination at its root, Indian Railways an offender

How courts have expanded jurisprudence for Manual Scavengers

The Manual Scavengers Act: Jurisprudence so far

Manual scavenger deaths: How effective is the law in preventing them?

Death down the drain

The post Eradicating Stigma: A Landmark Judgment on Manual Scavenging and Justice for Dalits appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In its order, the bench has not only questioned the validity of these claims but also mandated greater transparency and accountability from the state government, ensuring that the fight against manual scavenging is more than just a paper victory.

A tale of contradictions?

As per the order of the court, the Maharashtra government had, in 2023, declared that 36 districts across the state were free of manual scavenging. The said statement by the state was substantiated by certificates submitted by district collectors to the Union Government. These certificates were presented as evidence of the state’s progress in eliminating the practice, which is not only a social evil but also illegal under the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 (the Act of 2013).

However, the same claim of the government was challenged in court when petitioners presented evidence suggesting that manual scavenging continues unabated in several parts of the state. They cited instances as recent as April and August 2024, where manual scavengers were reportedly involved in sewer cleaning operations—some of which tragically led to fatalities.

“The Petitioners have filed a note giving instances of manual scavenging, and also, reference is made to the query raised by the National Human Rights Commission regarding the death of certain manual scavengers in April 2024. There is a reference to other instances of sewer cleaning in April and August 2024. The Petitioners also contend that if no manual scavenging as contended, then why was compensation given in 81 cases as per the state record itself.” (Para 4)

The petitioners questioned the government’s position while dealing with the issue of manual scavenging, pointing out a glaring inconsistency of how the government can make statements claiming that manual scavenging had been eradicated when data from official records showed that the state paid compensation in 81 cases related to manual scavenging deaths.

In response to the arguments raised by the petitioner, the Government Pleader clarified that the certificates declaring districts free of manual scavenging were based on data from 2022, not the current year.

“Now, it has been clarified by the Government Pleader that the report of the Collector referred only to the position of the year 2022 and not as of today, an inquiry will have to be made regarding the instances of manual scavenging. This is apart from the efforts to ensure that manual scavenging does not take place at all in the first place.” (Para 7)

Based on the same, the court noted in its order that that an inquiry would now be necessary to investigate these recent instances of manual scavenging, indicating that the state’s earlier claims might no longer hold true.

Accountability and transparency: The Court’s directives

The said case has brought the focus back on the definition of manual scavenging as outlined in the Act of 2013, and as interpreted by the Supreme Court. The court reminded the state authorities that any assessment of manual scavenging status must be aligned with this legal framework. To ensure greater accountability, the bench has directed the Maharashtra Social Welfare Department to take several significant steps:

1. Transparency in committee composition: The department has been ordered to publish the names and compositions of all committees formed under the Act of 2013 on its website. This includes State, District, and Vigilance Committees, with the exception of ex-officio members. The website is also required to regularly update details of actions taken by these committees, except where such information is sensitive or confidential.
2. Public reporting channels: The department must create a dedicated email address for each District Level Committee and Vigilance Committee, along with a social media handle where citizens and NGOs can report instances of manual scavenging. This initiative aims to enhance public participation in monitoring and reporting the practice, ensuring that the Social Welfare Department can fulfil its statutory duty.
3. Ensuring vigilance: The Commissioner of the Social Welfare Department, acting as the Nodal Officer, has been instructed to ensure that Vigilance Committees hold their meetings on time, circulate agendas in advance, and report the outcomes for public disclosure.

The court has set a deadline for these measures to be implemented, with the next hearing scheduled for September 9, 2024.

The complete order can be read here.

The unseen toll of manual scavenging

The present Bombay High Court order highlights the stark contrast between the Maharashtra state’s claims and the lived experiences of the marginalised communities in Maharashtra. It serves as a reminder that official declarations of progress are not always reflective of on-the-ground realities, particularly when it comes to deeply entrenched social issues like manual scavenging.

Manual scavenging, banned under the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, continues to claim lives due to inadequate enforcement and systemic negligence. The 81 cases that have been highlighted by the petitioners before the High Court wherein the state has paid compensation reveal the grim reality that this practice is still prevalent in Maharashtra.

It is essential to note that on October 20, 2023, a division bench of the Supreme Court had issued a comprehensive set of fourteen directives aimed at eliminating manual scavenging across the nation. The judgment, authored by former Justice S Ravindra Bhat, underscores the deep-seated stigma and dehumanisation endured by generations of manual scavengers. The Supreme Court’s directives had then emphasised upon the critical importance of implementing the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, and introduce robust measures for the rehabilitation of victims and their families. A key aspect of these directives is the significant increase in compensation for injuries or fatalities endured by manual scavengers, reflecting the need for justice and recognition of their plight. (Details may be read here.)

The court’s order for transparency, accountability, and public involvement is a critical step towards addressing these systemic failures. By ensuring that the government’s claims are subjected to public scrutiny and that the voices of those on the ground are heard, there is hope for real change. However, for this to happen, the state must go beyond mere compliance with court orders; it must commit to a sustained and genuine effort to eliminate manual scavenging and protect those who are still being forced into this deadly work.

It is important to highlight that on July 24, 2024, during a session of the Rajya Sabha, TMC MP Saket Gokhale raised an unstarred questions regarding the total number of manual scavenging incidents reported in the country over the last five years, along with cases reported through the ‘Swachhata Abhiyan’ Mobile App from 2020 onward. In response, the Minister of State for Social Justice and Empowerment, Ramdas Athawale, had stated that there has been “no report of the practice of manual scavenging in the country in the last five years.” He further noted that of the 6,256 cases uploaded on the mobile app from 114 districts, all were verified and none were found to be credible. (Details may be read here.)

The judgments of the Constitutional Courts remind us that the fight against manual scavenging is not just about law enforcement; it is about restoring dignity and humanity to those who have been oppressed for centuries.

Related:

Union Minister says no report of manual scavenging in last 5 years

Manual Scavenging: Eradicate the practice, ensure effective rehabilitation, scholarship, compensation, uphold dignity and liberty says SC

Manual Scavenging continues unabated, Indian Govts turns a deaf ear to acknowledge this systemic, extreme violence

Zero reported deaths due to manual scavenging: Ramdas Athawale

Eradicate manual scavenging completely says SC increasing compensation to families of workers who die at work to Rs 30 lakh

The post Bombay HC orders state Social Welfare Department to take steps towards eradicating manual scavenging, encourages greater transparency and accountability appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“Ours is a battle not for wealth of power. It is a battle for freedom. It is a battle for
reclamation of human personality”
– words of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar,
(quoted by Justice Ravindra Bhat)

On October 20, a division bench of the Supreme Court issued a slew of directions for the Centre and the states to follow with the aim of eradicating manual scavenging from Indian society. The bench comprising of Justices S Ravindra Bhat (now retired) and Aravind Kumar has emphasised on the importance of implementing the provisions of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013. The comprehensive set of fourteen directives issued by the Supreme Court are aimed at eradicating the practice of manual scavenging across the nation as well as establishing robust rehabilitation measures for victims and their families. A pivotal aspect of these directives revolves around significantly raising compensation for injuries or fatalities endured by manual scavengers.

In the judgment, authored by former Justice Ravindra Bhat, the Supreme Court has shed light upon the plight of the large mass of people indulging in the practice of manual scavenging, which continued even after India became an Independent state, and who have remained nearly invisible. “That was (a) centuries old stigmatising social practices that led to their depravation, to such levels that they were not even recognised as human beings. Among these practices was one which generations of people, were made to perform the meanest task of manual scavenging,” the judgment states.

What were the prayers made in the petition filed?

The division bench of the Supreme Court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), filed by Balram Singh under Article 32 of the Constitution, against the employment of manual scavengers. The petition had sought for the Supreme Court to issue directions to the Union of India as well as all the States and Union Territories in India to implement provisions of the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993 and the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013. 

The hearings:

• In February 2023, the Court had directed the Union of India to record the steps it had taken to prevent the employment of manual scavengers in accordance with the prohibition of employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act 2013. The court also ordered the Centre to record the steps taken by each state to abolish or demolish Dry Latrines, as well as the status of dry latrines and Safai Karamcharis in Cantonment Boards and Railways. During the previous hearing, the Court had further inquired whether the employment of Safai Karamcharis in Railways and Cantonments Boards were direct or indirect i.e. through contractors or otherwise.

• During the previous hearing, the court asked the Centre to inform it of the steps taken in accordance with the guidelines issued in the 2014 judgment “Safai Karamchari Andolan And Others vs. Union of India And Others.” In the aforementioned Safai Karamchari Andolan judgment, the Court issued an assortment of guidelines for the rehabilitation of manual scavengers, including cash assistance, scholarship for their children, allotment of residential plots, training in livelihood skill and monthly stipends, concessional loans, and so on. The judgment also established the minimum compensation in cases of sewer deaths and directed the railways to end manual scavenging on tracks.

• During the hearing on April 12, 2023, the Amicus, Advocate K Parameshwar informed the bench that the Indian Railways had employed cleaners for ‘insanitary latrine’ using protective gear. This does not fit the definition of manual scavenging, he had claimed.

“The Act says their engagement in Railway tracks is a problem. But then says employment under rules is allowed. The entire purpose of the Dry Latrines Act and earlier judgment was to have mechanised cleaning. But this brings it back,” said Advocate K Parameshwar, as reported by Livelaw. The Amicus Curiae said that the biggest culprit was the “Indian Railways in this instance”.

The Bench had then asked ASG (assistant solicitor general), Aishwarya Bhati regarding the measures that could be taken for states that had not formed the committees as directed by the Court. The Court also asked the Indian Railways to file a specific affidavit dealing with these aspects, and directed ASG Aishwarya Bhati to take instructions from the Railways.

• During the course of proceedings, on May 2, 2023, it was brought to notice of the court about irregular functioning of the Central Monitoring Committee envisaged under the Act of 2013. 

Submissions made by Amicus Curiae in the case:

The Supreme Court had appointed advocate K Parmeshwar as the Amicus Curiae in the case. As per the Amicus, Article 15, 17, 23 and 24 of the Indian Constitution gave the right to the oppressed classes to break away from oppressive structures and move to alternative sources of dignified employment. Based upon these aforementioned rights guaranteed, the 2013 Act can be deemed to attain a constitutional status. During the course of the proceedings, the Amicus had brought the following issues to the notice of the court:

• Lack of government figures on manual scavengers in the country, rendering it difficult to conduct any exercise on identifying and rehabilitating manual scavengers. The amicus also pointed to the data provided by National Commission for Safai Karamcharis (NCSK) that has flagged the issue of slow and erratic identification of manual scavengers.
• On the aspect of sewer deaths, the Amicus highlighted the definitions of ‘hazardous cleaning’ under Section 2(d) of the 2013 Act as well as the definitions of ‘sewer’ and ‘septic tank’ under Sections 2(p) and 2(q). He stated that though the Act prohibits hazardous cleaning under Section 7 and 9, no specific bar is made to the manual cleaning of sewers and septic tanks as long as protective gear is given.
• The Amicus also argued that there is a legislative vacuum in so far as rehabilitation for hazardous workers is concerned. The sole rehabilitation, according to him, is by virtue of the judgment of this Court in Safai Karamchari Andolan (supra) where this Court granted compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs to the family of a person who died in a sewer.
• As per the Amicus, a narrow interpretation of ‘forced labour’ should not be taken as this would fail to address structural discrimination and would also render the phrase “other similar forms of forced labour” otiose.
• It was further submitted by the Amicus that “consent” given by the worker to perform hazardous cleaning would not mean that labour is not forced. The Amicus Curiae argued that if it is accepted by the Court that hazardous cleaning is violative of Article 23, then the question of persons engaged in sewage cleaning having practiced it on their own volition does not arise.
• It was further urged that the protective gear and devices referred to must be of such nature that they achieve substantial or near total mechanization of the process so that the dignity of the labourer is maintained and no structural discrimination is perpetuated.
• Regarding NCSK’s working, the Amicus also pointed out that the Commission is only manned by 2 people currently, when it should have 7 commission members. Subsequently, the State commission for Safai Karamcharis existed in only few states.
• Additionally, the amicus curiae highlighted a lack of segregated data for women manual scavengers, while most of the manual scavenging work is done by women.

Analysis by the Supreme Court:

The Bench held that the 2013 Act not only criminalises manual scavenging but also provides for rehabilitation mechanisms to ensure that manual scavengers are emancipated. The first step towards rehabilitation that the 2013 Act, is the identification of manual scavengers through a survey. After their identification by a survey, a final publication of the manual scavengers is to be published under Section 11(6). On publication of the list, the emancipatory provision under Section 11(7) read with Section 6(2) takes effect. It declares that the manual scavengers stand discharged from any obligation to work as manual scavengers. This provision is the heart of the law, this declaration frees manual scavengers from the clutches of their historically oppressive professions. The law consequently empowers them through the process of rehabilitation. Therefore, the 2013 Act, including the provisions, must be interpreted as being in furtherance of fraternity, assuring the dignity of the individual.

Concerning the Government’s contention that the 2013 Act does not contemplate a national survey but mandates a localised survey at the level of local bodies and that two national surveys have already been conducted in 2013 and 2018, the Court after interpreting Section 11, said that the 2013 Act is not a regular statute, it is emancipatory in character and is a manifestation of the constitutional code of upliftment. Furthermore, the Court said that that neither the 2013 nor the 2018 surveys could have been conducted as prescribed under the scheme of the 2013 Rules and the 2013 Act because the institutions entrusted with duties to conduct the Surveys were either not constituted or were not functioning.

Additionally, the Court pointed out that the major short-coming in the implementation of the 2013 Act is that the State and the Central Governments have not even constituted the institutions that are required to implement the Act. This systematic neglect of the statute and inaction by the executive would reduce it to a dead letter.

Directions issued by the Supreme Court:

The court analysed the submissions made by the petitioners and the respondents during the hearings as well as the issues highlighted by the Amicus Curiae and issued a series of directives to both the Union and state governments. The said directions focussed on the effective implementation of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act of 2013. They also encompassed active measures for rehabilitating victims and their families, providing scholarships, and offering skill development programs.

1. Complete eradication of manual scavenging: The Court directed the Union to take appropriate measures and frame policies, and issue directions, to all statutory bodies, including corporations, railways, cantonments, as well as agencies under its control, to ensure that manual sewer cleaning is completely eradicated in a phased manner, and also issue such guidelines and directions as are essential, that any sewer cleaning work outsourced, or required to be discharged, by or through contractors or agencies, do not require individuals to enter sewers, for any purpose whatsoever;
2. Ensure that directions issued for eradication are followed by states: All States and Union Territories are likewise, directed to ensure that all departments, agencies, corporations and other agencies (by whatever name called) ensure that guidelines and directions framed by the Union are embodied in their own guidelines and directions; the states are specifically directed to ensure that such directions are applicable to all municipalities, and local bodies functioning within their territories;
3. Rehabilitation to include employment, education and skills training: The Union, State and Union Territories are directed to ensure that full rehabilitation (including employment to the next of kin, education to the wards, and skill training) measures are taken in respect of sewage workers, and those who die;
4. Compensation of Rs. 30 lakhs to be paid in case of sewer death: The court hereby directs the Union and the States to ensure that the compensation for sewer deaths is increased (given that the previous amount fixed, i.e., 10 lakhs) was made applicable from 1993. The current equivalent of that amount is Rs. 30 lakhs. This shall be the amount to be paid, by the concerned agency, i.e., the Union, the Union Territory or the State as the case may be. In other words, compensation for sewer deaths shall be 30 lakhs. In the event, dependents of any victim have not been paid such amount, the above amount shall be payable to them. Furthermore, this shall be the amount to be hereafter paid, as compensation.
5. Compensation in case of disability caused: Likewise, in the case of sewer victims suffering disabilities, depending upon the severity of disabilities, compensation shall be disbursed. However, the minimum compensation shall not be less than 10 lakhs. If the disability is ₹ permanent, and renders the victim economically helpless, the compensation shall not be less than 20 lakhs.
6. Mechanism for accountability: The appropriate government (i.e., the Union, State or Union Territories) shall devise a suitable mechanism to ensure accountability, especially wherever sewer deaths occur in the course of contractual or “outsourced” work. This accountability shall be in the form of cancellation of contract, forthwith, and imposition of monetary liability, aimed at deterring the practice.
7. Establish a model contract: The Union shall devise a model contract, to be used wherever contracts are to be awarded, by it or its agencies and corporations, in the concerned enactment, such as the Contract Labour (Prohibition and Regulation Act), 1970, or any other law, which mandates the standards – in conformity with the 2013 Act, and rules, are strictly followed, and in the event of any mishap, the agency would lose its contract, and possibly blacklisting. This model shall also be used by all States and Union Territories.
8. Modalities for conducting a national survey: The NCSK, NCSC (National Commission for Schedule Caste), NCST (National Commission for Schedule Tribes) and the Secretary, Union Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, shall, within 3 months from today, draw modalities for the conduct of a National Survey. The survey shall be ideally conducted and completed in the next one year.
9. Education and training of committees: To ensure that the survey does not suffer the same fate as the previous ones, appropriate models shall be prepared to educate and train all concerned committees.
10. Scholarships for dependents of sewer victims: The Union, State and Union Territories are hereby required to set up scholarships to ensure that the dependents of sewer victims, (who have died, or might have suffered disabilities) are given meaningful education.
11. Involvement of NALSA: The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) shall also be part of the consultations, toward framing the aforesaid policies. It shall also be involved, in co-ordination with state and district legal services committees, for the planning and implementation of the survey. Furthermore, the NALSA shall frame appropriate models (in the light of its experience in relation to other models for disbursement of compensation to victims of crime) for easy disbursement of compensation.
12. Coordination between commissions, states and union: The Union, State and Union Territories are hereby directed to ensure coordination with all the commissions (NCSK, NCSC, NCST) for setting up of state level, district level committees and commissions, in a time bound manner. Furthermore, constant monitoring of the existence of vacancies and their filling up shall take place.
13. Training and education modules for agencies: NCSK, NCSC, NCST and the Union government are required to coordinate and prepare training and education modules, for information and use by district and state level agencies, under the 2013 Act.
14. A portal with information on victims, compensation states and rehabilitation measures: A portal and a dashboard, containing all relevant information, including the information relating to sewer deaths, and victims, and the status of compensation disbursement, as well as rehabilitation measures taken, and existing and available rehabilitation policies shall be developed and launched at an early date.

Through the judgment, the Supreme Court realised the role that caste-based discrimination and social hierarchies play, and thus, have urged the Union, states and respective commission to works towards the complete eradication of manual scavenging. The judgment highlights how manual scavenging is compounded by deeply entrenched feudal and caste-based traditions, which largely lead manual scavengers to hail from marginalized caste groups relegated to the lowest rungs of the social hierarchy. These individuals are assigned occupations deemed deplorable by higher-caste groups, perpetuating social stigma, branding them as “unclean” or “untouchable,” and sustaining pervasive discrimination. Even after the Constitution prohibiting untouchability and discrimination based on caste, manual scavenging has still persisted.

Towards the end of the judgment, Justice Bhat deems it to be the duty of all citizens to realise true fraternity and the fundamental role that dignity and fraternity play in the Constitution. By issuing the aforementioned directions, the court has recognised that without these values, other liberties are mere illusions.

“Each of us owe it to this large segment of our population, who have remained unseen, unheard and muted, in bondage, systematically trapped in inhumane conditions,” Justice Bhat wrote in the judgment.

Justice Bhat called upon the citizens of the country to work towards dispelling the darkness that has plagued generations and to ensure that everyone can enjoy the freedoms and various forms of justice that are often taken for granted.

“Upon all of us citizens lie, the duty of realizing true fraternity, which is at the root of these injunctions. Not without reason does our Constitution place great emphasis on the value of dignity and fraternity, for without these two all other liberties are chimera, a promise of unreality,” the judgment stated

The hearing for monitoring progress in this matter has been scheduled for February 1, 2024.

The complete judgment can be read here:

Related:

Eradicate manual scavenging completely says SC increasing compensation to families of workers who die at work to Rs 30 lakh

Manual Scavenging continues unabated, Indian Govts turns a deaf ear to acknowledge this systemic, extreme violence

Zero reported deaths due to manual scavenging: Ramdas Athawale

No death due to manual scavenging: Social Justice Minister Athawale

Centre claims that nobody died due to manual scavenging reported in the last 5 years!

Orissa HC seeks proof of payment of compensation to families of manual scavenging victims

The post Manual Scavenging: Eradicate the practice, ensure effective rehabilitation, scholarship, compensation, uphold dignity and liberty says SC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Manual scavenging – or the practice of removing human excreta by hand from sewer lines or septic tanks – has been banned under the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013. But, shamefully, the practice remains prevalent in several parts of the country.

A two-member bench consisting of Justices Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar passed the directions while hearing a plea against the practice of manual scavenging.

The bench said that those who suffer permanent disabilities while cleaning sewers will be paid Rs 20 lakh minimum as compensation. Authorities will have to pay compensation of not less than Rs 10 lakh if the worker suffers other disabilities while cleaning sewers, it added.

The bench was pronouncing the judgment in the case Dr.Balram Singh v. Union of India, which is a Public Interest Litigation filed against the employment of manual scavengers. 

“Ours is a battle not for wealth of power. It is a battle fo t is a battle for reclamation of human personality” – these words of Dr.Ambedkar were quoted by Justice Bhat while pronouncing the judgment.

“If you have to be truly equal in all respects, the commitment that Constitution makers gave to all sections of society by entrenching emancipatory provisions such as Articles 15(2), 17 and 23 and 24, each of us must live up to its promise Union and States are duty bound to ensure that the practice of manual scavenging is completely eradicated.

“Each of us owe to this large segment of the population, who have remained unseen, unheard and muted, in bondage systematically trapped in inhuman conditions.

“The conferment of entitlements and placement of obligations upon the Union and States through the express prohibitions in the Constitution and provisions of the 2013 Act mean that they are obliged to implement the provisions in the letter and spirit,” Justice Bhat read out the operative parts of the judgement.

` “Upon all of us citizens lie the duty of realising true fraternity. It is not without reason that our Constitution has placed great emphasis on the values of fraternity But for these two, all other liberties are chimera. All of us today who proudly bask in the achievements of our republic have to awake and arise so that the darkness which has been the fate of generations of our people is dispelled and they enjoy these freedoms and justi and justice- social, economic and political- that we take for granted,” Justice Bhat read out from the judgment.” Today is the last day of Justice Ravindra Bhat in the Supreme Court as he retires. 

In 2014, the Supreme Court had directed that compensation of Rs 10 lakh should be paid to the 

kin of those who died while cleaning sewers or septic tanks from 1993 onwards.

On Friday, October 20, the court said that the government must ensure that right to equality is implemented and untouchability as well as child labour are abolished, reported Live Law.

“Union and States are duty bound to ensure that the practice of manual scavenging is completely eradicated,” the court said. “Each of us owes to this large segment of the population, who have remained unseen, unheard and muted, in bondage systematically trapped in inhuman conditions.”

The Supreme Court also said that under the 2013 law, the Centre and state governments are obliged to implement their provisions in the letter and spirit. The court has listed the hearing in the matter on February 1.

Centre’s data on sewer deaths

In July 2021, in a written response submitted to the Rajya Sabha, Social Justice and Empowerment Ministry admits that the inhuman practice of manual scavenging is still prevalent in India with over 60,000 manual scavengers identified across the country but insisted that ‘no one had died due to this practice’. At the time, Ramdas Athawale, the Social Justice and Empowerment Minister has informed the Rajya Sabha through his written answer on July 28, 2021, that “no deaths pertaining to manual scavenging has been reported in the last five years.” Interestingly, this answer by Ramesh Athawale had in July that year contradicted his own written reply dated February 2, 2021, where he had stated that the reported number of deaths stood at 340 across 19 States, with Uttar Pradesh topping the list at 52 deaths, as reported previously by SabrangIndia!

In March 2023, however, the Union government said that 1,035 persons have died while cleaning sewers and septic tanks across India since 1993. In addition, of the 616 cases registered under the Manual Scavenging Act against contractors for not providing safety gear to sanitation workers, only one has ended up in conviction.

The Self-Employment Scheme for Rehabilitation of Manual Scavengers was intended to deal with the problem by identifying all manual scavengers in the country and providing them with means to employ safer practices or give them alternative livelihoods. However, the budgetary allocation towards it has seen a significant decline since 2019.

In the earlier budget for 2019-’20, the Centre had allocated Rs 110 crore for the scheme, but the revised estimate stood at Rs 99.93 crore. While the 2020-’21 Budget estimate was Rs 110 crore, the revised estimate came down to Rs 30 crore. For the 2021-’22 Budget, the government had initially allocated Rs 100 crore, but the revised estimate dropped to Rs 43.31 crore.

Sabrangindia has consistently reported on the callousness of governments and contractors in not adhering to provisions of the law. Lives of manual scavengers, derided and living on the fringes of society have been also covered extensively.

Related:

Manual Scavenging continues unabated, Indian Govts turns a deaf ear to acknowledge this systemic, extreme violence

Manual Scavengers: 340 deaths, yet Centre has no intention to make stricter laws!

Karnataka: Two manual scavengers choke to death in a manhole

Manual Scavengers Act: Karnataka HC issues directions over implementation

Govt aims to eliminate manual scavenging by August 2021

The post Eradicate manual scavenging completely says SC increasing compensation to families of workers who die at work to Rs 30 lakh appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Raju* braves stench and dips into sludge of a manhole at Ber Sarai, Delhi. He takes the plunge without any protective gear and with inadequate information about what lies beneath. The staring eyes of his employer constantly warn against hesitation. After six hours of back-breaking dredging, Raju emerges from the manhole, caked with grime, only to earn Rs 400 (four hundred rupees) that evening.

Raju is among many people engaged in manual cleaning of sewage of Delhi after three decades of legal prohibition of this inhuman activity. “Financial needs prevail over fear. Every time I take risk to feed my family,” laments Raju.

The haphazard growth of Delhi into a metropolitan city has resulted in acute waste disposal crisis. Manual sewage cleaning is rampant in the city flouting all regulations. Various laws enacted to eradicate the practice have resulted in futile attempts without adequate political patronage. 

The Dalit community is blatantly exploited by urban India. The Socio-Economic Caste Census of 2011 has grimly suggested that more than 90 percentage of manual sewage cleaners belong to the Dalit community. People from the Valmiki caste, a section of the Dalit community, constitute a major chunk of Delhi’s sewer cleaners.

“I do odd jobs. But I am often compelled to do manual cleaning of the sewer when no work is available. I cannot the fill bellies of my children if I refuse to do this job,” said Raju flaking dried grime off his face.

Manual sewer cleaning is dangerous due to multiple factors besides it is dehumanisation of the workforce. Clogged sewage causes accumulation of toxic gases which may cause the worker to pass out. Some sewers are extremely deep, trapping the worker inside leading to suffocation.

“Contractors demand that we to continue with work even if we sense the presence of gases inside. They threaten with dire consequences if we refuse to work,” said Raju.

Prohibited by law, but continued in practice

The first attempt to legally prohibit manual scavenging was done in 1993 through The Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993. The act primarily dealt with the manual cleaning of dry latrines.

The ambit of the act was enlarged in 2013 through an amendment act. It included “hazardous cleaning” of septic tanks and sewersin the prohibited list. “Hazardous cleaning” by an employee is defined in the Act as manual cleaning by such employee “without the employer fulfilling his obligations to provide protective gear and other cleaning devices and ensuring observance of safety precautions, as may be prescribed or provided in any other law.”

The bill has defined sewers as “underground conduit or pipe for carrying off human excreta, besides other waste matter and drainage wastes.” The bill brought public and private employers within the ambit and sketchy recommendations for rehabilitation were also included. 

“The amendment itself is rife with ambiguities,” said Rakshit Kumar, a journalism student doing his research on manual scavenging in Delhi. “The bill prohibits ‘hazardous cleaning’. But more often than not, workers dive into deep sewers without protective gears at all,” he adds.

In the famous case Safai Karamcharis vs. Union of India 2014, the apex court has categorically banned manual sewer cleaning, terming it a violation of Article 17 ensuring abolition of untouchablity. Most of the cleaners are illiterate and are not aware of these rules. Besides, caste-based discrimination limits their chances to get another job.

In 2021, the Ministry of Social Justice had hinted at amending the scavenging law to totally ban manual sewer cleaning and introduce instead complete mechanisation. But the proposal is in cold storage waiting for revival by the government.

No conviction in deaths

In the last Parliament session, Raja Sabha MP Jaya Bachchan said in the House that in the last two years, as many as 1,470 manual scavengers had died across the country. According to data cited in the Lok Sabha by the Union Minister of Social Justice and Empowerment, Ramdas Athawale, 325 people have died in the last five years in “accidents” while cleaning sewer and septic tanks. Of these, Delhi stood third in the country with 36 deaths after Tamil Nadu (43) and Uttar Pradesh (52).

The government blames the lack of sanitary precautions by the cleaners as the cause of death, absolving employers from responsibility. Activists have decried the government’s apathetic attitude towards the marginalised sections. 

As no government or private contractors are held guilty, the relatives of the bereaved are denied justice and financial compensation. Many cases were registered by the Delhi government under the SC/ST Act and Manual Scavenging Prohibition Act of 2013 only after severe reproach from courts. “But conviction rate is negligible. In December, the Centre had said in the Parliament, that cases registered for violation of the law were at different stages but did not come to a logical conclusion,” informed Rakshit Kumar.

It seems the governments are washing off their complicity by passing the buck on to private contractors and their negligence. Safai Karmachari Andolan, an organization working to eradicate manual scavenging, alleges that the government is deliberately under-reporting death numbers to dodge responsibility.

Three years after the Delhi government’s Sani-enterprise initiative

In 2019, AAP government had rolled out an ambitious plan to make manual cleaners sani-entrepreneurs. The intention behind the move was to empower people engaged in manual sewer cleaning by providing them a decent source of income. This is despite manual scavenging being prohibited under the law, and the Delhi government launching a scheme to deploy cleaning machines to weed out the practice.

The Government extended loan to buy truck-fitted cleaning machinery costing 20 lakhs. The machines have been fitted with necessary equipment ensuring hydraulic, jetting, grabbing and roding work. It can ensure cleaning the manholes of 30 feet deep and can clean the sewerage and bring the silt, slug and other waste out to a trolley.

It was decided to provide such cleaning machines to 200 people already engaged in cleaning activities. Delhi Jal Board took the initiative to reduce the death related with manual cleaning of sewers.

But, after three years no considerable decline was recorded in the number of people engaged in hazardous cleaning activities. Procedural hiccups and financial constraints sealed the fate of the project. 

People were asked to submit Rs 4 lakhs as upfront money to get loan, a huge sum for people doing daily wage jobs. The apathy by private players to switch to machines also dampened the process of change.

When asked about the automation of sewer cleaning, Raju was apprehensive of his future. But he proudly bragged his resolve to support his children’s education to escape this inhuman profession.

* Mubashir is a journalism student at Indian Institute of Mass Communication, Delhi currently on internship with SabrangIndia

(With inputs from Rakshit Kumar, Delhi)

*Names were changed to protect the identity of individuals

The post Manual scavengers: Abandoned by state, derided by society appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image Courtesy: Vikas Choudhary

The report itself may be read here:

The lives and deaths of manual scavangers and sanitation workers

Manual scavenging refers to the practice of manually sanitation work such as cleaning, carrying, disposing or handling human excreta from dry latrines and sewers and involves the use of basic tools such as buckets, brooms and baskets. The practice of manual scavenging is inextricably linked to India’s caste system where those born into the supposed lower castes, such as Valmiki or Hela, were made exclusively responsible to perform this job.

Manual scavengers are, thus, at a double disadvantage. For one, they face enormous discrimination in society by being members of lower castes, and for another, they are disadvantaged because they are manual scavengers who clean human excreta. Their caste-designated occupation further reinforces the social stigma that they are unclean or “untouchable”. (See UN Brochure on Rehabilitating Former Manual Scavengers)

In their report, PUDR differentiates sanitation work into two kinds of tasks that both urban and rural sanitation work is divided into: the manual cleaning of toilets and carrying of feces from toilets (pre-dominantly performed by women) and the manual cleaning of septic tanks, sewers and gutters amid noxious gases with minimal or no safety precautions (performed by men).
 
[Note: The PUDR report has contended that official bodies have attempted to create a false distinction between the manual scavengers and sewer/septic tank cleaners so as to give priority should be given to manual scavengers. PUDR argues that such official narratives cause sanitation workers to be relegated to the background and questions as to the rights of sewer workers are left out of the debate.]
 
According to the data collated by the National Commission for Safai Karamchari, since 2017, one sanitation worker has died every five days in India while cleaning sewers or septic tanks. While a definite number of manual scavengers in 2018-19 has not been agreed on (see articles by The Wire, The Tribune India), at least 40,000 persons have been identified as such.
 
The main cause of deaths among sewage cleaners is the depletion of oxygen and presence of toxic gases, mostly hydrogen sulphide. At the bottom of septic tanks etc., the intake of hydrogen sulphide can result in death due to asphyxiation. Intake can also be irritating to the respiratory system, and result in nausea, delirium and convulsions and conjunctivitis. It is known that most sewage cleaners suffer from tuberculosis. Besides the severe health hazards, the sewage workers also become prone to frequent headaches, dizziness, sore throat, eye and skin irritation, poor memory, pneumonia and diarrhea among others. The extreme health risks caused by such noxious fumes were recently discussed in the Supreme Court. A three-judge bench while expressing serious concern over people dying during manual scavenging and sewage cleaning in India, said that nowhere else in the world are people sent into “gas chambers to die” like this.

Safai Karamchari Andolan’s (SKA) National Convenor and Magsaysay Award winner Bezwada Wilson has said that the smell of the gases in the sewage is so foul that it is humanly unbearable and the sewage cleaners consume massive amounts of alcohol before entering the pits so as to numb their senses to bear the state of sewerage. This results in these workers gradually getting addicted to alcohol and many die young due to the effects of alcoholism.  While the deaths inside the sewers have caught public attention, the longtime health hazards that either eventually lead to death or to a life infested with disease, are equally closely associated with this fatal occupation. Besides the recorded deaths caused by the toxic fumes, deaths are also caused by health risks that are not immediately fatal such as cardiovascular degeneration, skin diseases, respiratory ailments, jaundice, trachoma, etc.
 

Mobilising support and the legal scenario built around their protection

Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993 outlawed the manual carrying of human excreta, construction and maintenance of dry latrines. Sanitation workers engaged in sewage cleaning were not recognized as a category to be protected under this Act. The power to file a complaint against any violation of the Act rested with the sanitary officer or the collector, and not the aggrieved worker.
 
The National Commission for Safai Karamcharis Act, 1993 provided for the constitution of the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis (NCSK). Under the Act, a ‘Safai Karamchari’ was defined as a person engaged in, or employed for, manually carrying human excreta or any sanitation work.
 
In 2011, the Supreme Court proffered a judgement in National Campaign for Dignity & Rights of Sewerage & Allied Workers v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi wherein the Court issued a list of directives to provide legal protection to sewerage workers. The SC directives stated that sewerage workers must be provided with protective equipment by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, employment of workers is not to be terminated in the event of illness, medical treatment is to be provided to workers free-of-charge and surviving family must be given compensation in the event of a worker’s death. As the PUDR report notes, however, these reliefs fail to address the safety and caste-based stigma related concerns surrounding the manual cleaning of sewers and septic tanks.
 
The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 was the first to note that the practice of manual scavenging arises from “a highly iniquitous caste system” and acknowledge the urgency of rehabilitating manual scavengers. This Act recognises manual scavenging as not only to cleaning of dry latrines and carrying of human excreta but also the handling of an open drain or pit into which the human excreta from the insanitary latrines is disposed of’. The Act defines a sewer as “an underground conduit or pipe for carrying off human excreta, besides other waste matter and drainage wastes” thereby bringing in sewer workers within its ambit.

The Act outlaws the employment of any person for hazardous cleaning of a sewer or a septic tank, imposes a maximum imprisonment of two years and a contravention with imprisonment would extend it up to five years, and makes the local authorities duty-bound to use technological appliances for cleaning of sewers, septic tanks in order to eliminating the need for the manual handling of excreta in the process of their cleaning.
 
In Safai Karamchari Andolan and Others v. Union of India and Others, the Supreme Court acknowledged that the treatment meted out to sanitation workers is violative of the constitutional provision that abolished untouchability under Article 17 as well as the workers’ fundamental right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. The Supreme Court issued directives saying no fperson would be forced to enter sewer lines without required safety gear, and that for each worker’s death caused due to cleaning of sewers, a compensation of Rs. 10 lakh be paid to the family of the deceased. It also ruled that the government was liable to compensate those families of those as well who died in the sewage tanks or manholes in and after 1993. Through this order, a writ was issued to the central and state governments as well as the union territories to effectively implement the Acts of 1993 and 2013.
 
In 2015, Safai Karmachari Andolan launched a unique 125-day protest against the deplorable working conditions faced by sanitation workers. Named “Bhim Yatra”, the protesting sanitation workers travelled through 500 districts in 30 Indian states to testify to the indignities still suffered by them. They covered more than 35,000 km across the country, and culminated their journey in Delhi on the eve of Babasaheb Ambedkar’s 125^th Birth Anniversary. (See Stop Killing Us, the Bhim Yatra of India’s Manual Scavengers tells the Indian Government)
 
In the first six months of 2019, even by the most conservative estimates, fifty workers have died cleaning sewers in 20 states, according to data available with the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis (NCSK). Looking at these numbers, it is clear that even as of today protection to sanitation workers is only really offered on paper. 
 

PUDR’s investigative findings

The PUDR report details findings from their investigation into six incidents of deaths of sanitation workers in Delhi that occurred while they were cleaning sewers/septic tanks between 2017 and 2019. The report then looks into the commonalities of pattern and context within these cases and and other similar incidents while casting light on the workers’ lives and their labour conditions.
The six cases of sewer deaths covered in the report span all corners of the city, and include two commercial malls: DLF Capital Greens, Moti Nagar and Fun Republic, Anand Vihar. In discussing potential reasons for the sewer deaths, the report notes these three patterns in each case.

First, there is a lack of urban planning with respect to maintenance of the concerned sewerage and septage systems by the concerned authorities including the state, municipal bodies, institutions and private companies.

Second, the sanitation workers appointed to clean the sewers/septic tanks are offered no training for the job or provisions for safety gear and safety equipment. In many cases, the report notes, the workers were coerced into working even after they specifically refused to do the work owing to its hazardous nature and stating that they did not have the necessary training or experience to do the work. In instances where their specific reluctance has not been noted, those called to do such work were clearly not trained for it, and were either unaware of the dangers of the work or believed that they had no other option.

Third, no criminal proceedings are initiated against those guilty of deploying these sanitation workers into these hazardous working conditions. Total socio-economic vulnerability of the victims allows for their mistreatment and subsequent denial of rights. Predominantly, state government or courts only award monetary compensation against such deaths and grievous injuries when such cases are brought up to them. In the incident that took place in Bhagya Vihar, Rohini, while the owner of the property was being prosecuted, he belonged to a relatively socially and economically disprivileged background as well. It can be seen from these instances that those directly responsible for these deaths may avoid being indicted if they are powerful.
 

Sanitation v/s Sanitation Worker

The estimated expenditure of the Swachh Bharat Mission geared to make India Open Defecation Free (ODF) by 2 October, 2019 was $9 billion at the time of its inception. Only little focus is spared for the treatment of septage and waste water from the newly-made toilets and manual scavengers that would be employed to maintain the sewage system.
 
Similarly, while the 2015 Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna provides for building houses in rural India, it does not focus on any components of the sanitation value chain. These limitations are also recognised in National Policy on Faecal Sludge and Septage Management (FSSM) and Septage Management: A Practitioner’s Guide, 2017.
 
As PUDR notes in its report:
“The absence of official data serves as the best evasive response to questions of injustice. While the government basks in the glory of initiating a ‘Swachh Bharat’ campaign, recognizing the right to sanitation of all except the rights of sanitation workers, initiatives such as these actually retrench practices of manual cleaning in the absence of shift to technological resources. Such initiatives rely on forms of manual labour by making them appear as economic choices.”
 
In contrast, the monetary allotment for Self Employment Scheme for Rehabilitation of Manual Scavengers reduced from Rs 4600 crore on its passing in 2013 to Rs. 5 crore in 2017. What’s worse, not a single rupee off these allotments was released by the present government. By August 2018, the government had not even spent the funds released by the previous UPA government for this purpose. (See also: 2019-20 SC-ST budget allocation only for accounting purposes and not for real implementation)
 

Improper urban planning

The report quotes the “Sewerage Master Plan of NCT” to note that only about 50% of the population of Delhi NCT is covered by the sewer network. This existing 7000 km sewerage network also suffers from disrepair, siltation and settling or collapse. The sewage generated by the other half of the population belonging to the unsewered areas—the part often found living in unauthorized colonies, JJ clusters, and rural villages—goes into Yamuna River through a number of surface drains. These areas tend to rely more on septic tanks which need regular cleaning to remove waste water and fecal sludge accumulation.

Thus, such a debilitated waste disposal structure creates the need to frequently clean the sewage systems and septic pipes, and this requirement is primarily met by hiring sanitation workers. As has been observed by the Centre for Policy and Research, high-risk sanitation work is also increasingly informalised—the deceased workers often had no institutional relationship with the owner of the infrastructure and were hired either by contractors responsible for infrastructure maintenance or on-the-spot for a specific job. While at least officially, maintenance of state sanctioned sewerage is supposed to be a public and municipal matter, septic tank maintenance is private responsibility, making their monitoring more difficult. Because sewage network connectivity is not properly constructed, it also means that Delhi’s 34 Waste Water Treatment Plants are only utilised upto about 57% of their official design capacity.
 

Consistent failure of legal implementation

One common thread among all law and policy directives chosen with a view to benefit sanitation workers is the consistent failure in their implementation. As PUDR states:
“What makes these incidents significant is also the fact that they have been occurring repeatedly, apparently growing in frequency, at a time when the law (Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013) mandates that sending people to manually clean sewers, sewerage facilities and septic tanks without safety equipment, training and protection is a grave offence that carries stringent penalties. The Act has come to be better known through the frequency and impunity with which it is violated. Questions of lack of safety gear and absence of proper training of workers sent to clean sewers/septic tanks seems to dominate public discussion on the issue. Fundamental questions around whether manual cleaning of sewers and septic tanks should be permitted or not, mostly evade the debates both in the law and outside.”

While the 2013 Act has proven to be a significant improvement in the legal backing for the rights of sanitation workers, its biggest drawback is that while it defines cleaning of the sewers without safety gear and without safety precautions as hazardous, it does specify what can constitute ‘safety precautions’ and ‘safety gear’. This legislation notably does not recognise that, in most cases, the reason for death of sanitation workers is asphyxiation caused by exposure to poisonous gases. Such asphyxiation cannot be helped with gear and precautions.
 
Even in the Safai Karmachari Andolan case, it took the apex court twenty years (since the passing of the 1993 Act) to specify that sending persons in to manually clean sewers and septic tanks, closely handling waste materials can be included in the same category of violation as manual scavenging, and was a punishable act. It is also significant that continuous pressure had to be put upon the judiciary by the social movement of sanitation workers for their fundamental rights to be legally granted and underscored. The SC order in 2014 had asked the states to identify people who had died cleaning sewers 1993 onwards and award compensation to families. Over five years later, most states are yet to provide the data.
 
The crass disregard with which the government treats the issue of manual scavenging was exposed in 2015 when the Prime Minister’s lauded National Skill Development Mission listed manual scavenging as a possible ‘employment opportunity’ for people. (See this 2016 PUDR article)
 
National Commission for Safai Karmachari (NCSF) chairman M. Shivanna has directed local bodies and government departments to provide safety outfits to sanitation workers and to ensure that the workers wear them.
 

How complacence turns into casteism

Much has been said about the poor conditions faced by sanitation workers and how they reflect the continued indifference of the society at large. It is imperative to delve into how an incomplete understanding of the sanitation challenge can result into detrimental policy-making and implementation. The PUDR Report has contended the following points in this regard:
 
That Rashtriya Garima Abhiyan’s study from 2011 shows the perniciousness of caste nearly seventy years after the adoption of the Indian constitution. It stated that 94% of the sanitation workers who died were from Scheduled Castes, 4% were from Other Backward Classes and the rest from Scheduled Tribes. A few attempts to justify this deployment as traditional ‘ssuper-specialisation’ are made by authorities and dominant sections to relegate these hazardous and stigmatised jobs to these vulnerable communities. Such deployment of dalit workers in these occupations in modern contexts reinforces this link.
 
That the lack of attention to maintenance of sanitation systems is an absence which is completely caste driven, structural and systemic. There is no provision in the designing of these systems of sanitation (sewerage, septage etc.) that are crucial to the setting up and running of modern cities and towns, for their running and maintenance is also likewise not an innocent error but a systemic one. The policy makers’ fragmented approach to sanitation, their target driven approach (counting numbers of toilets, length of sewerage etc.,) and lack of attention to how the systems will run (whether or not there is water supply, and provision for maintaining toilets and sewers etc.), their neglect of and callousness towards who would do the work and how – are rooted in their deep acceptance of caste attitudes and hierarchy.
 
That even the NCSK, which was incorporated to protect the interests of the safai karamchari, recommended that mechanisation of sewer and septic tank cleaning should focus training those who are ‘traditionally’ engaged in sanitation work in its Annual Report of 2017-18. The Commission ‘strongly recommends’ that preference be given to the Valmiki community for the posts of safai karamchari as they have been ‘traditionally’ involved with the work.
 
Given the prevalent caste-based social attitudes towards the work of cleaning human and other wastes, the NCSK’s suggestions seem to reinforce the exclusive, indeed hereditary connection between these groups and the work of sanitation and cleaning wastes even if it is mechanized. Such interlinkages made between caste and identity result in workers remaining trapped in circumstances in which they have to keep performing unsafe and humiliating sanitation work, in spite of the heavy price they have to pay for it.
 

Is mechanisation the next step forward?

PUDR reports that some of the survivors of the discussed incidents were given machines for sewer cleaning by the state government in 2019. These machines, acquired at a cost of Rs. 40 lakhs each, are capable of negotiating narrow spaces, and work by “jetting” (the process of using a high pressure pump to remove different waste material), “grabbing” (hydraulically desilting the manhole) and rodding (rods rotating at high levels to remove the sludge).

Those given the machines, will be given the money earned from running the machines, directly into their accounts. The actual running of the machine will be done by private operators chosen through a process of tendering. Machine owners will be part of a consortium which will help others with the paperwork, working with the Delhi Jal Board (the authority handling waste management in Delhi) and sorting out problems with the running of machines. This consortium will be monitored by the Dalit Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DICCI), an organization that promotes entrepreneurship among members of the Dalit community. The report notes that 200 machines have been acquired by Delhi government and 250 drivers and 500 helpers have been hired (who will all be paid minimum wages).

As has also been observed by other sources, the main problem with this model are that by making manual scavengers owners of the machines the policy ends up reinforcing caste, and linking the people with caste-based work more firmly. By passing on the responsibility of implementation to DICCI, the state is further reinforcing caste-based labour and the template of attitudes towards sanitation work that caste brings, and abrogating its own responsibility towards ensuring the rights and safety of sanitation workers. Thus, while mechanisation could be a temporary fix to the problem, it cannot not be tackled by making descendants of manual scavengers continue the same work in a different form.
 

Demands made

It is clear that it will take a lot more than loans and gleaming new machines to bring long-overdue justice to sanitation workers. The PUDR report has demanded specific actions from the state, which include due implementation of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 and the directives in Safai Karamchari Andolan and Others v. Union of India and Others; criminal accountability of employers guilty of compelling workers to clean sewers/septic tanks; direct responsibility for sewerage allotted to the state, etc.

It is important to note that the right to sanitation should not be sought to be provided at the cost of the basic fundamental rights of sanitation workers. We must factor in the repeated deaths of sewer/septic tank workers into the design of present and future sanitation policies and campaigns of ‘cleaning’ India. The underlying caste-based attitude to sanitation work and workers should be identified and strong action taken against it.
 

The post Manual Scavenging still on: How Swachh is GOI’s conscience? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Excerpts from the paper “Where Bharat Goes” by Diane Coffey of the Research Institute for Compassionate Economics (RICE):

Several conference participants mentioned that villagers see few benefits of latrine use. The discussion at the 1956 conference also touched on another aspect of village life that is crucial to understanding rural sanitation outcomes today. In the words of Professor Karve, one of the conference participants, ‘[I]f we want to promote changes in the village we must recognize the importance of caste difficulties’ (Ministry of Health, 1957, p. 119).

Of particular importance in the 1950s was manual scavenging: In well-off households it was common for newlymarried women and the elderly to defecate in or near the home, and for the faeces to be carried away by a person from a sweeper caste. This unsanitary practice endangered health of the whole village, especially of the sweepers. People from manual scavenging castes were considered the lowest among untouchables and suffered severe discrimination.

The conference participants noted that as a result of economic exploitation and social exclusion many sweepers were leaving their work and migrating to cities. The participants resolved that additional attention to the situation of manual scavengers was needed, but they also opined that ‘it would be nearly impossible to expect the high caste people to cooperate in the manual handling of faeces’ (Ministry of Health, 1957, p. 115).

Data suggests that, although it still exists today, manual scavenging is not very common: The 2011 Census found that about 800,000 households, or less than 0.5 per cent, still use dry latrines serviced by humans (Government of India, 2012b). Nevertheless, the fact that manual scavenging and the extreme social exclusion that accompanied it were common in rural India’s past plays a crucial role in today’s sanitation outcomes.

To understand why, we need to understand how the latrines provided by the government work. The government builds and promotes pit latrines, which consist of an approximately 50-cubic-foot hole in the ground, lined with bricks and covered with a cement slab. These latrines also have a latrine pan connected to the hole, with walls or curtains around the pan for privacy. Where they are used, these affordable latrines are a boon to public health. They have been used to greatly reduce open defecation and the diseases it spreads in low- and middle-income countries all around the world.

For example, in rural Bangladesh, as of 2014, only 4.7 per cent of households defecate in the open, and 84.4 per cent of households use pit latrines (BDHS, 2014). Despite the success of pit latrines elsewhere, however, they are unpopular in India. The National Family Health Survey 2015-16 found that 55 per cent of rural Indian households defecate in the open, and that only 18 per cent use pit latrines (NFHS, 2016).
When rural Indian households build their own latrines, they are more likely to build expensive latrines with large underground tanks. Rural Indians tend to reject the affordable pit latrines promoted by the government, and which are used in other countries, because the pits, which fill up after a few years, require manual emptying.

If managed properly, manually emptying a latrine pit can be safe and hygienic from a biological perspective. That is because when a full latrine pit is left to decompose for a period of six months to a year, the faeces turn into fertilizer, which is safer to handle than fresh sludge. For this reason, the government recommends that each household have two pits: While one is decomposing, the other can be used.

Yet, as the conference participants pointed out in 1956, most rural Indians refuse to handle faeces; they see it as a task that only the sweepers can do. They believe that manually handling faeces would not only be degrading, but it would also result in their own social exclusion.

This view has changed little from the 1950s: Even when I or my research collaborators explain to villagers that emptying decomposed latrine pits poses little threat to their health, people are nevertheless extremely concerned about the social consequences of handling faeces (Coffey & Spears, 2017). The fact that affordable latrine pits need to be emptied manually means that few in rural India are interested in having one.
The 2018 survey described above confirms that rural households in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar still tend to practise open defecation until they invest in a latrine with a large tank or pit that is not emptied manually. The average cost of latrines that households built for themselves was Rs 34,000, which is far in excess of the Rs 12,000 subsidy, and implies investment in large pits or containment chambers.

Further, those households that had small pits (likely because they had received contractor-constructed latrines) were least likely to use them: the survey found that about 40 per cent of Hindus with small latrine pits (around 50 feet) defecated in the open (Gupta et al., 2019).

The Swacch Bharat Abhiyan (SBM) disregards the fundamental relationship between sanitation and caste. Although the programme is highly visible—the logo, Gandhi’s glasses, has even been printed on currency—the sanitation workers who clean public places remain highly invisible. In a 2014 article published in Economic and Political Weekly, Anand Teltumbde points out that India is less clean than other countries not because people are poorer, but because of the caste ethos that relegates sanitation work to people who are considered untouchable (Teltumbde, 2014).

Teltumbde explains that ‘(upper-caste) people derive a sense of superiority in littering the place, expecting it to be cleaned by a lower-caste scavenger’ (p. 12). Teltumbde argues that without addressing casteist attitudes towards sanitation workers, the SBM is unlikely to radically improve India’s cleanliness. Ravi Bathran, a scholar who researches manual scavenging, points out that the SBM has done little to change the fact that the Indian government frequently disregards its own rules and laws when providing public services (Bathran, 2015).

For example, most toilets in the Indian Railways dispose of faeces on the tracks, rather than collecting the waste and disposing it of hygienically. The choice not to outfit train cars with waste-collection containers not only is dangerous to health, but also means that the government hires people almost exclusively from sweeper castes to clean faeces from the tracks. The government also hires sweepers to manually de-sludge drains and deblock sewers and pipes. All of these practices are banned under the 2013 Anti-Manual Scavenging Act.

Yet, even the high-profile SBM has not made the necessary investments in machines and technology to prevent this work from being done by people. Bezwada Wilson, Magsaysay Award – winner and convener of the Safai Karmachari Andolan – warns that increasing the number of full latrine pits may also increase the demand for manual scavenging work, thus reinforcing the social exclusion and humiliation of manual scavengers (The Hindu, 2016).

These three omissions—failing to make provisions for latrine pit–emptying, failing to abide by the Anti-Manual Scavenging Act and failing to combat casteism against sanitation workers—are likely themselves enough to undermine the SBM.

 Courtesy: Counter View

The post Manual scavenging, social exclusion of past even today play crucial role India’s sanitation outcome appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post The sceptical Dalit, Left Feminist : my dear friend, Rajni Tilak appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post No Count of Deaths in Sewers and Septic tanks appeared first on SabrangIndia.