Legal Narrative
INTRODUCTION
The issue of manual scavenging in India, which continues despite over 75 years after independence and a flurry of laws against the practice, is perhaps the most enduring reminders of caste discrimination, government neglect and systemic policy failure. Notwithstanding constitutional guarantees of dignity, and equality enshrined under Articles 14, 17, 21 and 23 1 and statutory proscriptions which go back to the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 19932 the practice continues to take lives while reifying social exclusion. Not satisfied with the provisions of its earlier laws, the Parliament came up with the 2013 Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act (PEMSR Act) that not only criminalised employing manual scavengers, but it also laid down rehabilitation provision including livelihood support, housing, education and skill training.
However, more than a decade since its enactment, the effectiveness of the 2013 Act remains contested. Reports by the Safai Karamchari Andolan [1] , the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis, and civil society organisations highlight a glaring gap between the intent of the law and its implementation. While government data officially recognises about 15,000 manual scavengers, independent estimates suggest numbers running into lakhs. Between 2018 and 2023 alone, at least 339 deaths occurred while cleaning sewers and septic tanks, underscoring that hazardous, casteassigned labour continues unabated despite statutory prohibition.
This study henceforth aims to analyse the impact of the 2013 Act in eliminating manual scavenging. It examines whether the legal framework has succeeded in tackling the structural issues — caste, impoverishment and absence of mechanisation — that perpetuate the act. It also examines judicial interventions like People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India[2] and Safai Karamchari Andolan v. Union of India,5 as well as policy initiatives and rehabilitation measures to determine whether the Act has made a dent on the ground or if it continues to be an empty legislative exercise. In this way, the paper locates manual scavenging not as a question of legality or administration, but a live human rights violation and test of the country’s fidelity to constitutional morality and social justice.
1 The Constitution of India, arts 14, 17, 21, 23.
2 Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993.
MAGNITUDE OF ISSUE OF MANUAL SCAVENGING IN INDIA
The issue has its roots not only in the attitude of the greater society which continues to hold onto old ideas of caste hierarchy, but also with the administrative agencies that can change this with the authority and capacity they have. So, it is unfortunate for fact that the government will not acknowledge that this practice is occurring and declining, however this does not recognize that it is occurring at all. From our understanding the first issue is that the government will not treat the significance and importance of the issue seriously enough to engage in making visible a response in general denial or simply calling out those engaged in manual scavenging as a way to bring the issue to the forefront of their mind. Census data available in the country on Manual Scavengers is unqualified, or at least unreliable. Nor would a census even begin to qualify a systematic survey on manual scavengers, ways to bring to light the number of people fulfilling this occupation in the country. 
Even if there is a ban on manual scavenging and the government claims it is not real, census data from 2011 shows that there are more than 2.6 million dry toilets in India.6 The big question is how are these facilities being maintained if they are not being cleaned by people? That takes us down a path of another twist in the scenario. Another issue is the government does not perceive sanitation workers that go into sewers and septic tanks every day and clean them out as manual scavengers. The questioning will be how does the Government never start to move towards solving a problem if they don't recognize or acknowledge it. The only individuals recognized by the government as manual scavengers besides latrine cleaners are railway cleaners, sewer cleaners and faecal sludge handlers, but data is extremely poor in this area and almost everyone would admit that it is very inaccurate data. Estimates have ranged from 182,000 – 2 million people whose work is specifically recognized among different organizations. [3] There are also waste treatment plant workers, drain cleaners, community and public toilet cleaning, domestic work, school toilet cleaners, and at every juncture they work with human faecal matter as well as the dangerous waste. These people are also not recognized under the Act.
Even though there is legislation and judicial order against manual scavenging, manual scavenging still exists in India. There is some agreement that manual scavenging is practiced in India, but much disagreement exists regarding the data about manual scavengers in the country. NGOs such as the Safai Karmachari Andalon, believe the government is underestimating the number of manual scavengers in the country. Even government data, which has been provided in parliament on multiple
occasions, does not agree on the number of manual scavengers. Even the National Human Rights Commission made a statement in January 2021, indicating that the claims made by many States that there are zero manual scavengers and zero insanitary latrines are far from the truth.7 A parliament response in December 2021 indicated that a total of 58,098 manual scavengers had been identified as per the manual scavenging criteria developed under the 2013 Act. Caste-related data was made available for 43,797 manual scavengers of whom 97.25% belonged to Scheduled Castes.
According to the Socio Economic and Caste Census 2011 conducted by the Ministry of Rural Development and released in July 2015, there were a total of 1,82,505 manual scavengers in just the rural areas of the country.[4] However, it should be noted that the Socio Economic and Caste Census followed the member of the household reported data to the enumerator. The Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment has done two surveys in 2013 and 2018 to establish the exact number of manual scavengers in India by identifying - a total of 14,812 manual scavengers in the 2013 survey and 48,251 in the 2018 survey, thus being more than 63,000 manual scavengers' total. The 2018 surveys specifically were done in total in 18 out of the 29 states and 170 districts. There are various organizations, including the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis, who have claimed that this is only a glimpse into what manual scavenging really looks like in India and that the data clearly suggests that a nationwide survey that not only standardizes this one aspect should be done, but that also a real and accurate picture will most certainly only come.
In December 2021, in response to a question in the Rajya Sabha, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment stated that there has been no report of deaths due to manual scavenging in the last five years. Saying this, Union minister of state for social justice Ramdas Athawale used the Rajya Sabha as a platform to respond to the question raised by the Congress Rajya Sabha members Mallikarjun Kharge and L Hanumanthaiah. However, from 2017 to 2021, a total of 321 people died cleaning sewers and septic tanks. The data available from the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis shows that there were 954 sewer deaths between 1993 and July 2021. The National Commission specifies that this data is based only on what has been reported to the Commission from the States/UTs and print and electronic media etc. Hence even this data may not tell the whole story. The Safai Karmachari Andolan, a non-profit organization, working toward eliminating this inhumane practice, states that actual number of manual scavengers could be many more than those registered. The SKA website mentions that there are about 7.7 lakh sewer cleaners, and 1760 deaths of sewer cleaners have been registered since 2000. There are about 36,176 railway sewer cleaners.
Data from the National Crime Records Bureau indicates that no cases have been registered until 2014.
In 2015, there were two cases registered under the law in Karnataka state. The National Crime
Records Bureau (NCRB) ceased to indicate the number of cases registered under the Act separately within its main report from 2016, much like other Acts pertaining to special offences. While some data of cases registered under the 2013 Act was included in tables added at the end of the report, the report failed to indicate the exact number of cases registered under the Act in 2016 for Tamil Nadu state, where two cases were registered under the Act for that year. The report referred to the cases as in general form (as mentioned above). Therefore, from 2017, the data disappearance became worse, and data of incidences of manual scavenging under the Act, were combined with incidences of other existing incidences of “Other Special and Local Laws”. As a result, there is currently no way of knowing many cases are being booked under the 2013 Act from the data provided and released from the NCRB operational reports, as far as the NCRB reports are concerned. After analyzing the available data, one thing is clear, that there is a significant issue with data that comes from manual scavengers in various forms and data that makes it extremely difficult to efficiently enforce legislation and schemes designed for the relief and rehabilitation of manual scavengers. As mentioned above, if the government does not know who the manual scavengers are, then rehabilitation will not become a reality for, “Ravi, Didan, etc (names).” In conclusion, the issues with data will impact the overall effectiveness of relief and rehabilitation efforts in India.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Early Origin of Hierarchy and Occupation
Origins of manual scavenging the roots of the practice can be traced to the Aryan invasion in India dated at 1400 BCE. Varna-based society, based on purity and pollution, divided people by occupation with certain duties associated with various levels of purity. It was more clearly established by the Manusmriti before 200 CE and further developed Indo-Aryan social organization, "prescribing rules for four varnas: the Brahmin; also included in this category are the spiritual teachers and scholars), Kshatriya (the warriors and aristocrats), Vaishya (the agriculturists, artisans, merchants, and traders) as well as Shudra (the service providers). Outside this system were the 'avarnas or "untouchables," destined to work in degrading occupations such as removing dead animals, waste-handling and manual clearing of latrines.
Welcoming itself was not only social exclusion but religiously justified and it institutionalised pollution stigma inside caste practice. The "untouchables" were excluded from temples, education and social advancement altogether, resulting in sanitation work that was both hereditary and mandatory. In this context, manual scavenging was not an elected work but an imposed caste slavery.
Colonial Reinforcement of Occupation
The British colonial rule exacerbated this structural marginalization. In the latter 19th and early 20th centuries, as modern urban municipalities and underground sewers were established, colonial authorities formalized manual scavenging as a cheap type of labor[5], Manual scavengers and oppressed caste groups were specifically targeted and recruited to clean sewers, septic tanks, and the urban waste stream, with no regard for their physical health or dignity.
Rather than dismantling caste hierarchies, colonial practices formalized caste-reliant hierarchies into municipal governance structures. By embedding caste labor into the viability of public governance and modern sanitation, the British colonial state-maintained caste-based exclusion while framing urban development as progress. 
Post-Independence Constitutional Framework
The Constitution adopted in 1950 sought to break free of this oppressive history. It included Articles that were transformative: Article 14 (right to equality), Article 15 (prevention of discrimination on the ground of caste), Article 17 (abolition of untouchability), and Article 23 (prohibition of forced labour). In combination, these Articles aimed to eliminate caste-based assignment to degrading work.
However, despite the fact that the Constitution was a vision, the reality was markedly different. Manual scavenging prevailed especially in rural India, where dry latrines were often found. Courts and state administrations usually treated scavengers as essential workers and not citizens deserving dignity, showing the distance between constitutional protections and enforcement on the ground. 
From Early Laws to Prohibition
The first instance of direct legislative intervention was nearly forty years later with the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act 1993, which made it a criminal offence to employ manual scavengers or build dry latrines. However, this law was only enacted in 1997 and even when it was enacted, it was poorly enforced, as some state governments claimed that manual scavenging did not exist, so they avoided legal accountability.
The law proved to be inadequate in a number of official reports. In 2003, the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) reported that even huge financial allocations had failed to provide freedom for scavengers or convert dry latrines. In fact, manual scavenging persisted both in rural and urban areas, suggesting that the prohibition sans rehabilitation strategy was not effective. 2011 Census and Scale of the Problem
The Socio-Economic and Caste Census (SECC) of 2011 uncovered the widespread existence of the practice - 1,82,505 households disclosed that at least one person in their household engaged in manual scavenging in rural India, and almost 2.6 million dry toilets were still in use. [6] These figures challenged the successive denial of governments and reflected the systemic nature of sanitation work associated with caste.
Renewed Prohibition and Rehabilitation Act 2013
Growing pressure from civil society, especially the Safai Karamchari Andolan (SKA), enabled the passage of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act 2013. The law broadened the definition of manual scavenging to include the cleaning of insanitary latrines, septic tanks, railway tracks, and open drains without decomposition. Furthermore, the act adopted a model that was not purely punitive. It was both prohibitive and rehabilitative (with promises of financial assistance, skill training and alternative livelihoods for freed workers).
In the case of Safai Karamchari Andolan v Union of India (2014), the Supreme Court found that manual scavenging was a violation of fundamental rights; it ordered the strict implementation of the 2013 Act and awarded ₹10 lakh to the families whose members had died while cleaning sewers and septic tanks.
State Denial and Continuing Death
Nonetheless, several state and central governments have declared “there are no manual scavengers.” In 2021, the central government asserted that there was “no evidence” of manual scavenging, notwithstanding reports of deaths in sewers and septic tanks, documented by the media and NGOs.
Government statistics also noted that 339 workers[7] had died cleaning sewers from 2018 to 2023.
This gap between denial and reality highlights the tenacity of caste, poverty, and government apathy. Manual scavenging is not just an enforcement issue; it is evidence of a refusal to address the caste order that makes degrading work for Dalits possible.
LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK AT NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL LEVEL
Persistent of Practice despite Legal Prohibition
Regardless of multiple statutory and constitutional interventions, manual scavenging continues to occur in India, which signifies systemic gaps between law and practice. The Supreme Court in Safai Karamchari Andolan v Union of India (2014)[8] stated that the inability of the State to end manual scavenging constitutes a violation of fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 14, 17 and 21[9] of the Constitution. The Court asked all States to undertake comprehensive surveys, identify manual scavengers, provide them with rehabilitation, and report to the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis.
International Covenants, Protocols and Instruments
The problem of manual scavenging has not stayed within the domestic forum but has been raised in international meetings as a breach of human rights and labour standards.
UN Special Rapporteurs and Work-and-Descent Discrimination
In 2009, the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights requested a group of Special Rapporteurs to investigate discrimination on work and descent (DWD). Their report classified caste-based work (including manual scavenging in India) as a global human rights issue. They suggested Draft Principles and Guidelines for the Effective Elimination of Discrimination Based on Work and Descent, which stipulates duties of the state to:
(1) prohibit caste-based occupational discrimination
(2) dismantle structures that support hereditary work
(3) rehabilitate communities through targeted socio-economic interventions.
Although not legally binding, these guidelines have lived on as a reference point to assess India's commitment to equality provisions at the global level.
ILO Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958
India ratified Convention No. 111 in 1960, thereby committing itself to eliminate discrimination in employment on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction, or social origin. "Social origin" has been interpreted as including caste, meaning that assigning sanitation work
solely to Dalit communities is incompatible with India’s obligations. The Convention further obliges states to:
• enact anti-discrimination laws,
• formulate a national policy for equal opportunity,
• conduct educational campaigns, and
• establish specialized national agencies to monitor compliance.
However, India has failed to establish a comprehensive anti-discrimination regime in employment, with caste-based exclusion in sanitation continuing largely unabated.
ILO Convention No. 29 on Forced Labour, 1930
The ILO Forced Labour Convention obligates member states to eliminate all forms of forced or compulsory labour. Although ratified by the Government of India in 1954, forms of forced labour exist through manual scavenging, especially when Dalits are socially, economically or normatively forced into sanitation work. Some courts in India have recognized caste-based forced labour as a violation of Article 23 of the Indian Constitution, though the enforcement mechanisms remain ineffective.
UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD)
CERD’s 2007 annual report stated, “serious concern” over the enduring practice of manual scavenging in India, finding that “very large numbers of Dalits are compelled to work as manual scavengers.” The Committee appealed to India to enact stronger laws, and to implement statisticsbased political action to address the situation. Despite this, advocacy reports show state resistance to acknowledging the scale of manual scavenging in India, with DENIAL contradicting lived realities documented by NGOs and human rights groups.
Thus, while international law provides both normative obligations and moral authority, domestic resistance, bureaucratic denial, and caste structures limit their efficacy.
Constitutional Provisions
The Indian Constitution provides an extensive framework for protecting equality, dignity, and socioeconomic justice, all of which are directly implicated in the eradication of manual scavenging.
• Article 14: Ensures equality before the law. Any caste-based exclusion from dignified employment violates this principle.
• Article 16(2): Prohibits discrimination in public employment, yet sanitation jobs in municipalities continue to be caste-based.
• Article 17: Explicitly abolishes untouchability in all forms, making manual scavenging unconstitutional.
• Article 19(1)(g): Protects the right to practice any profession, but for Dalits engaged in scavenging, this is a theoretical right undermined by hereditary exclusion.
• Article 21: Interpreted by the Supreme Court to include the right to live with dignity, making manual scavenging a direct violation.
• Article 23: Prohibits forced labour, relevant in cases where Dalits are coerced to clean latrines under threat of social boycott.
• Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs):
◦ Article 41: Ensures right to work, education, and assistance.
◦ Article 42: Mandates humane conditions of work.
◦ Article 46: Directs the state to promote educational and economic interests of SCs/STs.
◦ Article 47: Places duty on the state to improve public health.
• Article 338: Establishes the National Commission for Scheduled Castes, tasked with monitoring safeguards for Dalits, including those in sanitation work.
While these provisions provide a strong normative framework, their enforcement remains inconsistent. Courts such as in Safai Karamchari Andolan v Union of India have repeatedly reminded the state of its constitutional obligations, yet violations persist.
Legislative Frameworks
Apart from plethora of constitutional provisions the legislature has enacted several enactments for the upliftment of the schedule class including manual scavengers. Some of the major enactments are as follows:
a) Protection of Civil Rights Act 1955[10]
Initially passed as the Untouchability (Offences) Act in 1955, the Act prohibited practices associated with untouchability. It was amended in 1977 to become the Protection of Civil Rights Act to impose stricter penalties and to make the offences cognizable and non-compoundable.
(b) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989[11]
The SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in 1989 created a very comprehensive mechanism for the prevention of violence and exploitation based on caste. The 2016 amendments[12] criminalized - specifically - forcing any person from SC/ST communities into manual scavenging [13]punishable with imprisonment of between six months and five years.
c) Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act 1993
This Act prohibited employment of manual scavengers and construction of dry latrines. However, poor enforcement and state denial undermined its impact.
(d) Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act 2013
The 2013 Act expanded the definition of manual scavenging to include cleaning of insanitary latrines, open drains, septic tanks and railway tracks. Importantly, it introduced rehabilitation measures such as cash assistance, skill development, and housing.
(e) National Commission for Safai Karamcharis Act 1993[14]
This Act created a statutory body to monitor implementation of schemes for sanitation workers and to redress grievances. Section 31 of the 2013 Act further empowered the Commission to oversee enforcement.
f) National Commission for Scheduled Castes[15]
The Commission, established under Article 338, looks into violations of rights of Scheduled Castes
(SCs); monitors safeguards provided for SC's; and recommends measures and safeguards to the Government with respect to socio-economic development of SCs.
The overall legislation is strong, at least on paper, nevertheless the biggest challenge lies in its implementation at the ground level.
Government appointed Committees and Commissions
Since manual scavenging is undignified and degrading work performed by the harshest backward class of Indian society, it has attracted considerable attention since independence. The Government of India has from time to time constituted many committees and commissions, each providing practical recommendations aimed at the rehabilitation and social inclusion of scavenging communities.
Barve Committee
In 1949, the former Government of Bombay appointed a commission called the Scavengers' Living Conditions Enquiry Committee with V.N. Barve as Chairperson to examine and inquire into the living conditions of the scavengers of the State of Bombay and to suggest means and methods to improve their work conditions and to fix their minimum wages. The Committee submitted its report to Bombay Government in 1952. 
Kaka Kalekar Commission[16]
In the year 1953, a commission known as the Kaka Kalekar Commission was appointed as the first Backward Class Commission under the chairmanship of Kaka Kalekar, and they submitted their report in 1955. The Commission report declared that the condition of manual scavengers is subhuman and condemned the obsolete techniques of collecting night-soil and sanitation that involved manual removing of human excreta by scavenging communities. The Commission also chastised municipal corporations for being the biggest sinners in this regard.
Malkani Committee[17]
During its meeting on October 12, 1957, CHWB resolved to constitute a high-level committee to study the problem of manual scavenging in detail. The scavenging conditions inquiry committee was formed under the chairmanship of Professor N.R. Malkani. The committee provided its report in 1960. In its report, the committee attributed the existence of dry latrines as a significant barrier to the removal of manual scavengers in India.
Committee on Customary Rights[18]
In 1965, the Central Department of Social Welfare appointed another committee, again under the chairmanship of Prof. N.R. Malkani, to study the question of the abolition of customary rights of
the manual scavengers. This committee gave its report in 1966. It found that in places where scavenging is not a municipal responsibility, the latrines are cleaned by private persons, and that a scavenger enjoys some hereditary right to cleaning such latrines as a result of customs and agreements. A customary relationship develops between the householder and the scavenger, and the latter receives some form of payment.
Pandya Committee[19]
The National Labour Commission appointed a sub-committee headed by Bhanu Prasad Pandya in 1968-69 to investigate the working conditions of sweepers and scavengers. The sub-committee did not attract significant attention from either the central or the state governments. Nonetheless the subcommittee recommended enacting a central legislation to provide the extent to which working conditions and living conditions of the sweeper and scavenging communities should be regulated and also draw up a sufficient a fast enforcement system.
ROLE OF JUDICIARY AND ITS PRONOUNCEMENTS
On the contrary, the judiciary has always played an assertive role in promoting the cause of socioeconomic welfare by converting several directive principles into actionable rights for the upliftment of poor and weaker sections of society. A liberal interpretation of article 21 of the constitution has created a multitude of rights and has led to an emergence of social welfare jurisprudence in India. The judicial response to manual scavengers has recently been quite stern, and courts have reprimanded State authorities for not abolishing manual scavenging practices.
Safai Karmachari Andolan v Union of India 2014[20]
The Supreme Court firmly declared manual scavenging to be inhuman, degrading, and undignified and it violates the fundamental rights of people, especially Dalit people. The Court held that both the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993
(EMSCDL Act, 1993) and the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 (PEMSR Act, 2013) must be read in conjunction with Articles 17 and 21 of the Constitution of India which prohibit untouchability and the right to life with dignity, respectively. [21]
Chief Justice P. Sathasivam noted that, as per official statistics released by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (2002–2003), India had identified 676,009 manual scavengers, greater than 95% of whom were Dalit. This exposed the reality of caste-based exclusion and structural discrimination, which continued to uphold manual scavenging despite constitutional and statutory prohibitions.
The Court also recognized the state's obligations towards international human rights, including:
• The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR, 1948), acknowledging the inherent dignity of all human beings.
• The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD, 1965), stating that discrimination based on descent, or caste, is prohibited.
• The Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW, 1979), particularly salient as women comprise a majority of manual scavengers.
To ensure the elimination of manual scavenging and to rehabilitate the communities borrowed my waste, the Court issued binding directions:
Sewer Deaths - The Court would criminalize access of sewerage lines without appropriate safety measures in place. A formula of a single compensation of ₹10 lakhs to the family of for every death in sewage (manholes, septic tanks, etc.) was also ordered.
Railway Tracks - Indian Railways were ordered to formulate an action plan with a fixed time frame to end the practice of manual scavenging on railway tracks, where it had been in practice on a very large scale.
Rehabilitation and Livelihood Support - Functionaries responsible for removing the deceased from manual scavenging must receive their derived legal entitlements challenged by bureaucratic adherence. There also must be special focus on women custodial workers for assumed dignity and alternative livelihoods as per their skills of choice.
Compensation and Justice - The families of all persons who had died in relation to sewage work, irrespective of the legal response of the family since 1993, were to be identified and the family awarded ₹10 lakhs as compensation.
Implementation of PEMSR Act, 2013 - The Court ordered strict implementation of the provisions of the 2013 Act was to be strictly implied to specifically the provisions of Part IV (rehabilitation provisions). Also, state governments and Union territories were to be made accountable for and even held responsible for no action or violation against the provisions within the Act.
Delhi Jal Board v National Campaign for Dignity & Rights of Sewerage & Allied Workers25
In this case, the Supreme Court issued a precedent-setting judgment that acknowledged and underscored the neglect and suffering of disadvantaged segments of society, in this case, scavengers and sewage workers who, act with disregard to their own safety and security, descend into the sewage systems without protection, have denied their fundamental rights to equality, life and liberty for over sixty years. The Supreme Court based its facts on a report and said -
“The workers are suffering from high mortality and morbidity due to exposure at workplace. 33 workers had died in last 2 years due to accidents while working on the blocked sewer lines...59% of the workers enter underground sewer manholes more than 10 times a month and half of them have to work more than 8hours a day... 41 workers have reported syncope, and other 24 reported temporary loss of consciousness. A little over 1/3 of the workers had been immunised against tetanus while none of them had been vaccinated against hepatitis B. Approximately 46 % of workers across all age group were found to be underweight according to Body Mass Index (BMI) calculation....All daily wagers were getting a wage of approximately 2950 rupees per months without any other benefit irrespective of service period” 26
On the issue of judicial activism and overreach by the court, as contended by Delhi Jal Board the
Supreme
Court observed-
“Whenever one of the three constituents of the State i.e., judiciary, has issued directions for ensuring that the right to equality, life and liberty no longer remains illusory for those who suffer from the handicaps of poverty, illiteracy and ignorance and directions are given for implementation of the laws enacted by the legislature for the benefit of the have-nots, a theoretical debate is started by raising the bogey of judicial activism or judicial overreach and the orders issued for benefit of the weaker sections of the society are invariably subjected to challenge in the higher courts. In large number of cases, the sole object of this litigative exercise is to tire out those who genuinely espouse the cause of the weak and poor.
25 2011 (8) SCC 568.
26 Centre for Education and Communication in collaboration with Occupational Health & Safety Management Consultancy Services on “Health & Safety Status of Sewage Workers in Delhi”.
The Supreme Court also chastised the government and the state apparatus for its insensitivity to the safety and welfare of those in poverty, who were forced to work in extremely adverse conditions and face the constant risk of death. The Supreme Court also chastised the elitism of the wealthy regarding litigation in the public interest - or Pro Bono litigation.27 The Supreme Court not only directed that increased compensation would be awarded to the families of the deceased but also directed the civic bodies to ensure immediate compliance to the directions and orders that were passed by the High Court of New Delhi to ensure the safety and security of the sewage workers.
Balram Singh v Union of India 202328
In Balram Singh v. Union of India (2023), the Supreme Court of India provided guidelines implementing the Supreme Court's 14 directions to address manual scavenging and provide effective implementation of Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 (2013 Act) as well as compliance with Articles 17, 21, and 23 of the Indian Constitution. The guidelines have the intention of eliminating manual scavenging, protecting the dignity of workers, and providing rehabilitation for workers. Important aspects include:
Survey Implementation: Municipalities are required to conduct surveys in accordance with Section 11 of the 2013 Act to identify manual scavengers.
Mechanical Cleaning: Where possible, mechanical devices should be used to clean sewers, as a human should not be required to clean them.
Worker Protection and Rehabilitation: Safeguards are required to protect workers and their families, including compensation and rehabilitation for families of workers who die while cleaning in sewers or septic tanks.
Eradication measures: The 14 directions include:
27 Supreme Court emphasised the importance of the petitions filed pro bono publico for protection of the rights of less fortunate and vulnerable sections of the society, observed:
There is a misconception in the minds of some lawyers, journalists and men in public life that public interest litigation is unnecessarily cluttering up the files of the court and adding to the already staggering arrears of cases which are pending for long years and it should not therefore be encouraged by the court. This is, to our mind, a totally perverse view smacking of elitist and status quoits approach. Those who are decrying public interest litigation do not seem to realise that courts are not meant only for the rich and the well-to-do, for the landlord and the gentry, for the business magnate and the industrial tycoon, but they exist also for the poor and the down-trodden, the have-nots and the handicapped and the halfhungry millions of our countrymen.
28 33 Dr. Balram Singh v. Union of India (2023) 2023 SCC Online SC 1386
▪ Issuing regulations required to implement the 2013 Act.
▪ Providing compensation to workers and their families. Prohibiting manual scavenging completely.
▪ Promoting the education and training of manual scavengers for rehabilitation.
▪ Providing scholarships to children of manual scavengers.
▪ Establishing monitoring commissions.
▪ Establishing a computer portal to collect and store data transparently.
The Court made it clear that the Union and State governments must comply strictly and cited institutional failures as a significant barrier. The guidelines and directions provided by the Court seek to protect the rights granted by the Constitution and eradicate manual scavenging completely.
GOVERNMENT/ADMINISTRATIVE SCHEME
The Indian Government has committed funding for the modernization of sanitation. National sanitation schemes focus on modernizing human waste management. These are Sulabh Shauchalaya Scheme (1974), Integrated Low-Cost Sanitation Scheme (1981), Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (2009) and more recently, the Swacch Bharat Abhiyaan (2014). Some schemes for the welfare of scavenging communities are:
Self-Employment Scheme for Rehabilitation of Manual Scavenging (SRMS) - government launched this scheme in April 2007 with a view to liberating the manual scavengers and rehabilitating them. Central Government has revised the SRMS for rehabilitation of all the manual scavengers identified under the provisions of the Manual Scavengers Act, 2013. The main components of the Scheme, in the form of one-time cash assistance, training with stipend and concessional loans with subsidy for taking up alternative occupation. 
The National Scheme of Liberation and Rehabilitation of Scavengers and their Dependents (NSLRSD) - was initiated in 1989, with the aim of liberating manual scavengers from their present and hereditary inhuman profession of cleaning night soil and filth, and to facilitate and engage them in alternative and dignified occupations. Conferential to this, a report CAG published in 2003, concluded that scheme did not achieve its objective whilst investing Rupees 600 crores. The report also pointed that “there was lack of correspondence between ‘liberation’ and ‘rehabilitation’ and there was no evidence to suggest if those liberated have been rehabilitated."[22]
Integrated low-cost sanitation scheme - The Government of India's Ministry of Urban Employment and Poverty Alleviation and HUDCO are taking up a major program for integrated low-cost sanitation to convert dry latrines to low-cost waterborne sanitation and simultaneously free the manual scavengers. HUDCO has additionally been aiding basic sanitation schemes. 
The Nirmal Bharat Abhiyaan (NBA) (2009-14) and Swach Bharat Abhiyaan (SBA) (2014-19): The underlying cause of manual scavenging is poor waste disposal systems which include dry latrines and open defecation, and the Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC) was conceived in 1999, rebranded as Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan in 2012 to aim for 100% sanitation in rural and urban areas by 2017, only to be succeeded by Swach Bharat Abhiyan (SBA) in 2014. SBA has been conceived with the following objectives:33
i. To eliminate open defecation.
ii. To eliminate manual scavenging.
iii. To modernize and scientifically manage municipal solid waste.
iv. To bring about behavioral change in relation to proper sanitary practices.
It is ironic that despite multiple constitutional, statutory and administrative safeguards and frameworks, the condition of manual scavengers is still atrocious. The identification of manual scavengers has moved at a glacial pace, and essentially the rehabilitation schemes for the benefit of manual scavengers have been largely unsuccessful 
What factors led to the continuation of Manual Scavenging
India continues to witness manual scavenging as a continuing hereditary practice, which is active since the establishment of a caste-based jajmani system. Socially, economically and politically relevant conditions, have produced negative impacts, which have directly or indirectly supported the recognition of this practice in an unequal society where people remain linked to a degrading form of work, thus justifying the negative attitudes surrounding such forms of labor based on caste recognition. Manual scavengers, often members of marginalized communities, are rejected by society as viable candidates capable of being employed in alternative occupations, leaving them perpetually bound to manual scavenging occupations. [23] Economically, heaps of low-income makes it incomprehensible to envision future sustainable pathways to other forms of livelihoods without high amounts of capital extended for alternative forms of labor: often through impetuous dependency on loans, for which often takes the form of exploitation through debt bondage across labour contexts, and caste reinforced social exclusion from accepting forms of possible employment elsewhere. In some contexts, manual scavengers are paid through tokens such as bread or rotis, which presents
serious ethical considerations surrounding the economic vulnerability further experienced by manual scavengers.
One of the most significant barriers to freedom from manual scavenging is the absence of educational opportunity in communities affected by it. The low literacy levels of the manual scavengers and their families ultimately restrict their access, or ability to remain in school (research consistently indicates that because of stigma, children of manual scavengers face discrimination as well as ill-treatment in the schools they attend, and this leads to higher dropping out rates). The lack of education also sustains poverty and continued relegation to occupations in their communities, as education is widely known to liberate people from poverty and allows for social and economic mobility out of limited, spatial patterns of survival.
Political and administrative shortcomings add to the endurance of the practice of manual scavenging. The Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993, has been largely unsuccessful in identifying victims for almost 25 years while the practice continues to exist. Additionally, the lack of an individual right to file a grievance under the Act has diminished accountability. Significant organizations, such as railways, municipalities, cantonment boards, and state governments, routinely deny the existence of manual scavenging in their systems by filing false affidavits to deflect accountability. Karnataka was one of the first regions to ban the practice in the 1970s; however, there is still weak enforcement throughout the country.
Welfare programs that have attempted to eradicate manual scavenging have failed. Previous programs focused solely on sanitation and ignored the human dignity component. The vulnerability of women and children, the largest group in this trade, was ignored. Job willingness is also sustained by inadequate civic amenities, such as the lack of water supply in public toilets or septic tanks that overflow. The inhumane practice is sustained by municipal inefficiencies that wastewater, which is a serious issue in and of itself. 
The Comptroller and Auditor General of India’s 2003 audit report indicated the Government of India (under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment) did not successfully implement the National Scheme of Liberation and Rehabilitation of Scavengers and their Dependents, which was commenced in 1992, even after investing over Rs. 600 crores over ten years. The ongoing practice of manual scavenging is still evident by the deaths of workers cleaning septic tanks and drains, exemplifying the dangers of this work.
The Socio-Economic and Caste Census (SECC) 2011, published by the Ministry of Rural Development on July 3, 2015, identified 182,505 manual scavengers in rural areas. Additionally, a National Survey carried out in 2018-19 by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment through the National Safai Karamcharis Finance and Development Corporation (NSKFDC) identified 47,775 manual scavengers in 194 districts. By December 31, 2019, the total number of identified manual scavengers increased to 62,334, of which states and Union Territories reported 14,812. The scale is staggering and continues to remain an ongoing problem, despite legislation and programs aimed at addressing the issue.
The persistence of manual scavenging in India is a multifaceted problem predicated on caste discrimination, economic circumstances, lack of education, and systemic failure of policy implementation. Solutions to manual scavenging will be multifaceted, requiring an initial focus on dignity, education, and effective enforcement of the law to end the cycle of exploitation and marginalization.
The Relationship between Swachh Bharat Abhiyan and Manual Scavenging
Launched in 2014, the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan (SBA) is a national campaign to promote cleanliness, which has a focus on sanitation and cleanliness in public places across India, particularly for the purposes of ending open defecation through toilet construction. However, the relationship between SBA and manual scavenging—a dehumanizing, caste-based practice of manual removal of human excreta—has raised valid questions. While SBA provided some advances in infrastructure, it further complicated the problem of manual scavenging, faced by scavengers, because although it built latrines, these facilities lacked adequate supporting mechanisms for maintaining sanitation and cleaning sanitary systems, and cultural taboos continued to freeze the manual scavenger in their low status position. The relationship is detailed below. 
The SBA's lofty aim of achieving an open defecation free India by building millions of toilets is encountering significant obstacles. Although over 100 million toilets have been built, cultural and behavioral challenges still persist, particularly in rural regions, where many continue to choose open defecation-like habits even when a toilet is available-more so due to old habits that were handed down and/or simply not knowing of the benefits of sanitation. Some toilets have been used for storage rather than its intended purpose. According to a World Health Organization (WHO) report, open defecation occurs in alarming quantities, nearly 173 people per kilometer. That's the highest density anywhere on earth (World Health Organization, 2017)! This shows that building toilets does not directly imply usage, due to socio-cultural and infrastructural barriers that still exist.[24]
The construction of toilets under SBA has led to an increase in septic tanks and sewers, but the lack of adequate sewage and waste disposal infrastructure has inadvertently perpetuated manual scavenging. Many newly built toilets lack connections to functional sewage systems, and there is no robust mechanism for emptying septic pits. According to a 2020 report by the Ministry of Jal Shakti, India has 816 municipal Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs), but only 522 are operational, leaving a significant gap in waste management (Ministry of Jal Shakti, 2020). This inadequate infrastructure forces reliance on manual scavengers to clean septic tanks and sewers, reinforcing this caste-based occupation. The absence of mechanized solutions for waste disposal further entrenches the practice, contradicting SBA’s aim of promoting dignity and sanitation.
The Indian Railways is an example of the systematic challenges the implementation of SBA has created as they are one of the largest employers of manual scavengers. With just under 80,000 toilets located in its trains and 115,000 kilometers of track, the Railways largely depend on the work of manual scavengers to clean excreta as most of the trains do not use bio-toilet technology, and they lack proper sanitation or waste disposal facilities (Indian Railways, 2020). This leads to a dangerous working environment for the scavengers they employ, who are often from marginalized caste communities. The lack of technology in waste disposal or cleaning demonstrates a lack of alignment between the stated goals of SBA and the reality of daily operations on the ground.[25]
A significant proportion of toilets built under SBA suffer from operational deficiencies, further complicating the issue of manual scavenging. Reports indicate that nearly half of these toilets lack essential amenities like water or electricity supply, rendering them dysfunctional or underutilized (National Sample Survey Office, 2019). Without proper water supply, toilets become unhygienic, requiring manual cleaning, which perpetuates the reliance on scavengers. This systemic failure highlights the need for a holistic approach that integrates toilet construction with sustainable waste management and behavioral change initiatives.
THE EMPLOYMENT OF MANUAL SCAVENGERS AND CONSTRUCTION OF DRY LATRINES (PROHIBITION ACT), 1993
The Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993[26] which received assent on June 5, 1993, represented the first enactment in independent India legislating against manual scavenging, which is a caste-based, degrading activity encompassing the manual cleaning, carrying or disposal of human waste, mainly performed by Dalit populations. The Act was passed almost forty years after India gained independence in 1947 and sought to address a horrific system which existed since colonial times, despite constitutional protections such as Article 17 (prohibiting untouchability). There was urgency for the legislation as it was preceded by resolutions from six states under Article 252 of the Constitution[27], to abolish manual scavenging and its appropriation in the construction of dry latrines (toilets that use no water seal, and require manual cleaning), all of which stemmed from increased activity and pressure from Dalit movements and state governments to abolish a practice that stemmed from untouchability. In its drafting by the Ministry of Urban Development under the P.V. Narasimha Rao government, the intended purpose of this legislation was to preserve dignity and promote public health both by legislation communes across India through notifications made by states.
The preamble of the Act states that “Whereas fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual has been enshrined in the Preamble to the Constitution; And whereas, Article 47 of the Constitution, inter alia, provides that the State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties; and whereas the dehumanizing practice of manual scavenging of human excreta still continues in certain parts of the country despite various provisions in the municipal laws; And whereas it is necessary to enact a uniform legislation for the whole of India for abolishing manual scavenging by declaring employment of manual scavengers for removal of human excreta an offence and thereby ban the further proliferation of dry latrines in the country”35
The preamble connects the Act to constitutional values of fraternity and dignity (Preamble), public health (Article 47) , and the need for uniform legislation to tackle a practice that continues to take place despite municipal laws, explicitly referring to the six state resolutions under Article 252.
Issues in the Act
The narrowness of the 1993 Act was a key factor preventing it from functioning effectively, as it did not encompass the full range of manual scavenging activities. The Act defined manual scavengers as those who carry human beings' excreta from dry latrines in Section 2(b), but did not include any other dangerous work, such as cleaning sewers, septic tanks, open drains, or railway tracks. Because of the narrow definition, employers could avoid the ban by representi
