The Human Cost of Urban Sanitation: Manual Scavenging in Cities

Introduction

"Until dignity is non-negotiable and caste no longer decides who cleans, the city remains unclean—no matter how shiny its streets."

At the core of India’s increasingly urbanizing cities with posters flashing “smart city” insights everywhere, ages-old injustice silently persists in the background. While the elite class reaps the benefit of urbanization, Dalit labourers continue to climb into manholes and septic tanks, often devoid of any personal safety equipment to physically clear human waste. This practice, called manual scavenging has been outlawed for more than three decades in India and yet, quietly persists in bustling urban streets.

Despite the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation, 2013 being passed, and the judiciary repeatedly asserting the practice as a violation of fundamental rights, manual scavenging remains a caste based occupation that disproportionately targets the most marginalized groups. This goes on to show the failure of urban India’s sanitation infrastructure that is still dependent on these unseen workers even as legislation purports to have abolished the practice.

This blog underscores the contradictions between law and ground reality, the structure and ethics that enable manual scavenging to persist in Indian cities and poses a tough question- What does it speak about our laws and our cities when the people who clean them still perish in the sewers?

Legal Framework

Manual scavenging has been for a long time criminalized in India with preliminary attempt made by the legislature in the 1993 Act that deemed the practice unlawful. However, this was narrow in scope. It imposed heavy fines and imprisonment in case of violation but fell short in providing socio economic rehabilitation of families liberated from manual scavenging who had no alternative means of employment. Then came the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 which made the law more stringent while providing rehabilitation for the families. However, instead of imposing a blanket prohibition, it does allow the practice when done using protective gears as provided in Section 2(d) of the Act.  This defeats the very objective of the Act making it a regressive shift by subjecting it to conditional requirements.

The Central government had also launched the National Action for Mechanised Sanitation Ecosystem (NAMASTE) scheme in 2023-24 which aimed to enable 100% mechanical cleaning of septic tanks and sewers so as to achieve zero fatalities in sanitation work. Even after two years since its launch, this scheme’s intended vision is yet to materialize where Dalit workers still risk their lives in sewers across urban India.

The Supreme Court, in Safai Karamchari Andolan v Union of India (2014)^..  declared manual scavenging a clear violation of Articles 14, 17, and 21, and held the state liable for sewer-related deaths. Despite all the comprehensive legal framework, this practice thrives—largely due to systemic loopholes, municipal inaction, and the deep entrenchment of caste hierarchies in urban sanitation work.

Why the law fails?

The continued existence of manual scavenging in Indian cities exposes deep cracks in enforcement, governance, and social reform. Among the main contributing factors are-

1. Lack of accountability by authorities- Even after more than 10 years of criminalizing manual scavenging, it has hardly resulted in any convictions. A particularly controversial point is perhaps the Union Government’s assertion that manual scavenging as a practice has ended, distinguishing it technically from hazardous cleaning of sewers and septic tanks under the 2013 Act. This bureaucratic refusal to take accountability shields them from any responsibility.

   
   

2. Unavailability of adequate rehabilitation opportunities- Another issue for the non-liberation of manual scavengers is inadequate resources for rehabilitation. The allocated funds for rehabilitation schemes fall way too short of what is actually required. Many former manual scavengers struggle due to limited access to financial support like loans, gaining new skills for alternative career options, and maintain dignified livelihoods.

   
   

3. Social stigmatization of urban sanitation- Manual scavenging is not just a labour issue but a hereditary occupation based on the ancient caste system. Historically referred to as "untouchables", Dalits were given the lowest and the most dehumanizing jobs. According to the data published by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, 42,594 out of a total of 43,797 surveyed manual scavengers are from Scheduled Caste category clearly indicating a overconcentration of Scheduled Castes among sanitation workers involved in manual scavenging. Without any chances of finding other sources of income, they were forced to continue this practice that later became embedded in the societal system.

   
   

4. Lack of mechanization- The absence of mechanized tools forces labourers into this job. Such tools are even underutilized in certain places since human labour is seen as a cheaper alternative. This poses serious risks on worker safety making them vulnerable to toxic gases and fatal outcomes.

   
   

5. Fragmented urban governance- Urban sanitation is controlled by a fragmented network of state ministries, municipal bodies, and private contractors—leading to diffused responsibility. It facilitates easy blame-deflection by governments and difficulty in redressal for victims.

What needs to change?

Eliminating manual scavenging requires real change and not just a symbolic ban. Following are some key recommendations to address the issue-

1. Technological upgradation of urban sanitation infrastructure- Deploying automated sanitation technologies such as modern sewer cleaning machines and robots can be channelised to reduce dependency and ultimately eradicate manual scavenging. Efforts made to improve funding for sanitation infrastructure and providing universal access to safe and hygienic toilets, offers a transformative path to end the exploitative practice of manual scavenging.

   
   

2. Public-Private Partnerships- PPPs can significantly contribute in this area by leveraging the strength of both the sectors in providing sustainable solutions. A notable PPP instance is the Bandicoot robot manhole‑cleaning project pioneered by Genrobotic Innovations in collaboration with government agencies like the Kerala Start-up Mission, Kerala Water Authority, and municipal corporations. Pilot installations in 2018 commenced in Thiruvananthapuram and former manual scavengers are now trained as robot operators leading to a way more well regulated and honourable job alternative. In Kolar Gold fields, Karnataka, a pilot PPP between local government, NGOs and Safai Karmachari Andolan (SKA), put in place a simplified piped sewerage system, cutting out the need for manual cesspit cleaning. More than 70% of the homes did not have toilets before. This people-centred approach demonstrates how PPPs driven by infrastructure can substitute manual scavenging.

   
   

3. Monitoring rehabilitation and integrating social security schemes with the 2013 Act- Effective rehabilitation being one of the key aspects in eliminating manual scavenging, also remains a major shortcoming of the Act. It must provide them with job security and stability, equitable access to land, proper housing and provision for free, qualitative education for their children. Rehabilitation should focus on training and skill development so as to provide alternative job prospects to manual scavengers. Social security schemes such as PM Awas Yojana should be linked with the 2013 Act.

   
   

4. Caste-sensitive urban policies- Manual scavenging, rooted in caste hierarchies must be addressed through caste inclusive urban reforms. Urban local bodies can organize community led awareness programmes. Developmental policies should include anti-discrimination policies in municipal hiring and ensure fair representation of Dalit communities in decision making of urban planning and sanitation.

Conclusion

In India’s quest for sustainable and inclusive urban transformation, the plight of the most oppressed communities cannot remain deliberately unheard. Constitutional promises of equality and dignity exist and so does manual scavenging. Its continuance to this day is a legal and moral failure that stains the fabric of urban democracy. Abolition needs more than just laws on paper; it demands for a structural overhaul that dismantles caste hierarchies at their very foundation. Municipal apathy and denial must give way for a radical reform and a governance model that centres Dalit voices.

As long as Dalits continue to suffer in the sewers while the law looks away, the promise of urban development will remain hollow. Sanitation must never cost someone their life. Reform is not optional—it is overdue.