Blog

By Sujit Bhar

Manual scavenging—defined as the practice of manually cleaning, carrying, disposing of, or handling human excreta from dry latrines, sewers, or septic tanks—is not merely illegal in India; it is an act that violates human dignity at its very core. Despite constitutional guarantees of equality, multiple central legislations banning the practice, and repeated judicial reprimands, manual scavenging remains a persistent stain on the nation’s socio-legal landscape. What was once justified by distorted interpretations of “sacred texts” and caste-based social hierarchies, continues to survive in modern India, sometimes even under the patronage of government bodies entrusted to uphold the law.

This paradox was once again exposed when the Calcutta High Court, in a strongly worded judgment delivered on November 21, expressed deep concern that manual scavenging continues unabated despite stringent prohibitions under the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013.

The case in question—stemming from a 2021 tragedy where four workers died and three were injured while cleaning an underground sewer in South Kolkata—revealed glaring lapses in governance, accountability, and enforcement by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) and the state authorities.

The incident at the heart of the litigation occurred when workers engaged by the KMC to de-silt a sewer line became unconscious due to the inhalation of toxic fumes inside a manhole. Four workers died, and three suffered severe injuries. The victims, mostly from historically marginalised communities, were performing the very activity that the law outlawed and condemned.

The public interest litigation (PIL), filed by the Association for Protection of Democratic Rights (APDR) along with a civil rights activist, sought:

• Independent investigation.
• Compensation for the victims’ families.
• Action against those responsible for violating statutory prohibitions.
• They relied heavily on Supreme Court precedents, including:

(a) Safai Karmachari Andolan vs Union of India (1993).

(b) Delhi Jal Board vs National Campaign for Dignity and Rights of Sewerage Workers (2011).

(c) Dr. Balaram Singh vs Union of India (2023)

Through these rulings, the Supreme Court set the minimum compensation for any manual scavenging-related death at Rs 30 lakh, acknowledging state responsibility for allowing such unlawful practices to continue.

STRONG INDICTMENT

The division bench of Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das delivered a scathing assessment of the authorities’ conduct. The Court noted: “It is disheartening to see cases of death and severe injury due to manual scavenging still plating in courts today. This issue is a stark reminder of the country’s ongoing struggle to ensure basic human dignity and rights for all citizens… Manual scavenging is a grave human rights concern and its persistence is a blot on the nation’s conscience.”

The High Court found that KMC and the state government attempted to evade responsibility by placing blame solely on the contractor involved. Although KMC had formed a committee, blacklisted the contractor, and paid Rs10 lakh each to the families of the deceased, the Court was unconvinced. The responsibility to ensure compliance with the law, the Court held, ultimately rested on the municipal authority, which could not absolve itself by outsourcing work.

In alignment with Supreme Court guidelines, the bench ordered:

• Rs 30 lakh compensation for each deceased worker (minus the Rs 10 lakh already paid), to be disbursed within three months.
• Rs five lakh compensation for each of the three surviving injured workers.
• An independent investigation into the incident.
• Setting up of the statutory monitoring committee mandated under the 2013 Act.

The state police admitted that an FIR had been registered, but failed to produce a status report—another sign of systemic laxity. The Court remarked that it was “shocking” that a PIL had to be filed to secure compensation already mandated by law.

ILLEGALITY UNDER A GOVERNMENT BODY

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this case is not that a contractor violated the law, but that a municipal corporation—the KMC—allowed or enabled the continuation of manual scavenging. This raises serious questions about:

Administrative complicity: Local bodies often unofficially encourage or tolerate manual scavenging for quick, inexpensive labour solutions.

Lack of enforcement of mechanisation mandates: Cities today have machines such as jetting machines, suction pumps, and robotic sewer cleaners. Yet many continue deploying humans into toxic manholes.

Institutional apathy: No accountability mechanisms exist within many government bodies. Internal audits and safety protocols are weak or nonexistent.

Caste prejudices embedded within bureaucracy: Deep-rooted biases mean officials may not perceive manual scavenging as a serious injustice, particularly when the victims belong to marginalised communities.

Absence of monitoring committees: The 2013 Act mandates vigilance and periodic review by state-level monitoring committees. Many states simply never constituted them, and some did so only recently—mainly after judicial intervention.

In modern India, where laws, machines, and judicial guidelines exist to eliminate manual scavenging, its continuation reflects not technological failure, but moral and institutional failure.

MANUAL SCAVENGING TODAY

Despite being outlawed, manual scavenging persists across India—from metro cities to smaller towns and rural areas. Its survival is rooted in a long history of caste-based social stratification, where certain communities, primarily Dalits, were historically coerced into sanitation-related occupations. There are certain imperatives that cloud the mind:

1. Religious misinterpretation and social conditioning: While the core religious scriptures do not explicitly mandate such caste segregation for sanitation work, centuries of social conditioning coupled with rigid caste hierarchies created a belief that certain groups were “meant” to serve others in degrading ways. The idea that some castes are “polluted” and must handle “impure” tasks continues to inform social attitudes, even among modern urban populations.

2. Social acceptance of exploitation: In many parts of the country, manual scavenging is not viewed as a crime but as a “traditional occupation.” Entire communities are expected to continue this work, and refusal often results in economic or social retaliation.

3. Normalisation of caste-based labour: Many Indians, despite education and economic progress, unconsciously adhere to caste-coded labour divisions. This makes manual scavenging seem invisible or “normal” to the majority.

4. Religious and social excuses for inaction: Some continue to justify the existence of manual scavenging through misinterpreted religious norms, believing it to be part of a divine or natural social order. Such beliefs, though inaccurate and unjustifiable, influence social behaviour and prevent community-level activism against the practice.

WHAT ABOUT SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY?

A critical but under-discussed dimension is the responsibility of ordinary people. Despite legal prohibitions, citizens rarely report incidents of manual scavenging to the police or labour authorities. This inaction stems from a few critical factors:

• Indifference—People consider sewer cleaning someone else’s job.
• Caste prejudice—A belief that “these people have always done this work”.
• Ignorance—Many are unaware that manual scavenging is a criminal offence.
• Fear of confrontation—Some fear reprisals from contractors or municipal staff. And this is very real, especially within today’s politically surcharged atmosphere.

Citizens must recognise that reporting manual scavenging is a legal duty and a humanitarian obligation. Every ignored incident contributes to further loss of life and dignity. Manual scavengers die every year from toxic gas inhalation, suffocation, or poisoning—all preventable deaths.

As long as society remains silent, the exploitation will continue. The law cannot function without community vigilance.

To eradicate manual scavenging, India requires a multi-pronged and proactive strategy:

1. Comprehensive mechanisation: Every municipal body must be mandated—and funded—to replace human labour with machines. Equipment must be regularly maintained; adequately supplied; operated by trained personnel; strict audits on usage should ensure no human enters a sewer unless in emergency situations, and with full protective gear.

2. Strong criminal liability: Officials permitting manual scavenging—directly or indirectly—must face suspension, departmental action and criminal prosecution under the 2013 Act. Without personal accountability, systemic negligence will continue.

3. Rehabilitation and skill development: Workers historically forced into this occupation should receive guaranteed alternative employment, skill training, educational support for families and priority access to welfare schemes. Also, rehabilitation must be meaningful, not tokenistic.

4. Public awareness campaigns: Anti-manual scavenging campaigns should be as widespread and visible as those for Swachh Bharat, anti-dowry and anti-child labour. Only societal awareness can dismantle caste biases underlying the practice.

5. Strengthening monitoring committees: States must activate monitoring bodies with independent experts, civil society representation and quarterly reporting to High Courts or the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis. These committees must function with transparency and legal authority.

6. National database of sewer deaths: A public, updated register of all sewer-related deaths and injuries will promote accountability and allow citizens to track government performance.

NEED FOR COLLECTIVE CONSCIENCE

The Calcutta High Court’s ruling is not merely a legal directive—it is a moral indictment of a society that continues to allow one of the most degrading practices to persist in the 21st century. Manual scavenging is not just a violation of law; it is the denial of humanity itself. Despite technological advances, legal frameworks, and judicial activism, the practice survives because of a toxic combination of institutional apathy, caste prejudices, religious misinterpretations, and societal indifference.

India cannot aspire to moral or economic progress while consigning a section of its citizens to death in sewers. The eradication of manual scavenging requires government action, citizen vigilance, and a collective rejection of caste-based discrimination.

Until then, every sewer death remains a reminder—not only of administrative failure—but of a nation still struggling to uphold the dignity and rights of all its people.

The post Death of Humanity and Conscience  appeared first on India Legal.