Innovative Movements and Legal Battles Against Manual Scavenging

India’s battle against manual scavenging is not just a legal story – it is a story of people refusing to accept that some human beings must be born into degradation. Despite the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993, being on the books for over three decades, the practice persisted in shocking numbers. What has genuinely moved the needle are the twin forces of grassroots mobilisation and persistent legal activism – led most notably by Sulabh International and the Safai Karamchari Andolan (SKA). Together, they represent a hopeful, if still incomplete, arc toward abolition.

The problem that law alone could not fix 🔗

When Parliament passed the 1993 Act, it was a historic step. The law prohibited the employment of manual scavengers and the construction of dry latrines – pit latrines cleaned by hand. But law on paper and law in practice are two different things. According to the 2011 Census, nearly 7.94 lakh dry latrines were still being cleaned by manual scavengers across India, mostly women belonging to Dalit communities. States continued to act in denial. Enforcement was virtually absent. It was in this vacuum that civil society stepped in.

Sulabh International: technology as liberation 🔗

Sulabh International, founded in 1970 by Dr. Bindeshwar Pathak, took a dual approach that distinguished it from conventional advocacy: it combined toilet technology innovation with direct rehabilitation of manual scavengers. Dr. Pathak’s core insight was that as long as dry latrines existed, people would be employed to clean them. The solution, therefore, had to be structural – replace the latrine itself.

The two-pit pour-flush toilet 🔗

Sulabh’s flagship invention, the two-pit pour-flush toilet (Sulabh Shauchalaya), uses a water seal that eliminates the need for manual removal of excreta entirely. This technology, affordable and easy to construct, was introduced widely across India and rendered the practice of manual scavenging unnecessary in thousands of homes. Sulabh claims to have made 240 towns scavenging-free and provided direct employment to around 35,000 people through its public toilet complexes.

The Alwar and Tonk model: rehabilitation in practice 🔗

Perhaps the most cited example of Sulabh’s success on the ground is its work in Alwar and Tonk, two towns in Rajasthan. Sulabh’s five-point intervention programme in these towns liberated women from manual cleaning of dry latrines and then enrolled them in skill development programmes – covering vocational training in beauty culture, food processing, tailoring, and embroidery, along with personality development courses. The results were tangible: women who had been barred from entering upper-caste homes were subsequently welcomed back into those same homes as beauticians and caterers. Social acceptance followed economic empowerment. The initiative was acknowledged at the national level by the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi as a historic step forward.

Dr. Pathak’s philosophy was clear – economic independence is the most practical tool to break the cycle of caste-based discrimination. Sulabh’s broader reach includes the construction of biogas plants that convert human waste into renewable energy, creating a “waste-to-wealth” model that simultaneously removes the need for manual labour and generates sustainable livelihoods for rehabilitated workers.

Safai Karamchari Andolan: the legal battle 🔗

While Sulabh worked through technology and rehabilitation, the Safai Karamchari Andolan (SKA) chose a different weapon: the courtroom. Founded in 1994 by Bezwada Wilson along with S. R. Sankaran and Paul Diwakar, SKA began as a community movement in Karnataka, where Wilson himself was born into a family of manual scavengers. His father had worked as a safai karamchari in the Kolar Gold Fields since 1935. Wilson’s personal experience gave the movement its moral urgency.

From streets to the Supreme Court 🔗

SKA initially worked at the state level – documenting dry latrines, shaming local authorities into action, and mobilising manual scavengers to refuse the work. In 2003, SKA along with six other civil society organisations and seven individuals filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court of India. The petition argued that the continued existence of manual scavenging violated the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 (equality before law), 17 (abolition of untouchability), 21 (right to life) and 23 (right against exploitation) of the Constitution – and that the 1993 Act was being openly flouted by states and government departments including the Railways, Defence, and Education.

What made the SKA’s litigation stand out was its evidentiary foundation. Rather than relying on abstract legal arguments, Wilson mobilised hundreds of volunteers from within the manual scavenging community to conduct ground surveys across the country. Within six months, the Court was presented with sworn affidavits containing names of manual scavengers, locations of dry latrines, addresses of owners, socio-economic profiles, and photographic evidence. This data was not just compelling – it was irrefutable.

The 2014 Supreme Court judgment 🔗

After more than a decade of proceedings, the Supreme Court delivered its landmark verdict in Safai Karamchari Andolan v. Union of India (2014). The judgment traced the direct constitutional connection between Article 17’s prohibition of untouchability and the practice of manual scavenging, holding that the practice violated both the constitutional mandate and statutory law wherever it continued. The Court issued a series of binding directions:

• The Union and State Governments were directed to fully implement the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013.
• Detailed rehabilitation guidelines were to be established – including one-time cash assistance, scholarships for children of manual scavengers, allocation of residential plots, and skill development training.
• The Indian Railways – identified as the largest employer of manual scavengers in the country – was directed to implement a time-bound strategy to end manual scavenging on tracks.
• Families of sanitation workers who died on duty were to be compensated with ₹10 lakh.

Wilson described the verdict as a victory of manual scavengers fighting for their liberation against the repeated denial of both central and state governments. The Court’s interim orders during the decade-long litigation had already produced results: district administrations in several states had been convinced to remove dry latrines, and rehabilitation under previously neglected government schemes had begun in multiple areas.

The 2013 Act: a stronger legal framework 🔗

The sustained advocacy of SKA played a direct role in the enactment of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 – a significantly stronger law than its 1993 predecessor. The 2013 Act expanded the definition of “manual scavenger” to include persons cleaning septic tanks, open drains, and railway tracks. It mandated systematic surveys to identify manual scavengers, required publication of lists, and established a comprehensive rehabilitation framework – photo identity cards, one-time cash assistance of ₹40,000, back-end capital subsidies for self-employment, skill training with a monthly stipend of ₹3,000, housing assistance, and educational scholarships for children.

Under Section 8 of the Act, anyone who employs a person in manual scavenging is liable to imprisonment of up to two years, or a fine of up to ₹1 lakh, or both. The 2013 Act also called for the complete mechanisation of sewer and septic tank cleaning – removing any legal justification for hazardous manual labour underground.

Garima Abhiyan and other movements 🔗

SKA and Sulabh have not been alone. The Campaign for Dignity (Garima Abhiyan) in Madhya Pradesh has assisted more than 20,000 women to leave manual scavenging as an occupation. The campaign focused on both persuading women to abandon the work and pressuring local bodies to convert dry latrines into sanitary ones. These community-level movements share a common thread: they treat the issue not merely as a sanitation problem but as a human rights crisis rooted in caste – one that requires social transformation alongside legal reform.

Technology as the next frontier 🔗

One persistent criticism of legal reform has been that prohibition without technology creates an impossible situation – sewers still need to be cleaned, and without machines, humans remain the default option. Sulabh International addressed this directly in 2018 when Dr. Pathak launched what was called the “Hope Machine” – a mechanical sewer cleaning device developed by Pune-based firm Kam-Avida. The machine uses high-pressure jets and a mechanical bucket to clean sewers from ground level, eliminating the need to send workers inside manholes. Built to navigate narrow lanes just six feet wide, and equipped with a gas-detecting device, it represents exactly the kind of innovation that can reconcile the gap between legal prohibition and ground reality.

What remains unfinished 🔗

Despite these significant strides, enforcement remains the weakest link. Government data shows that between 1993 and 2021, at least 971 people died while cleaning sewers and septic tanks. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) observed in 2021 that the eradication claimed by state and local governments is far from reality. According to findings of the 57th Standing Committee on Social Justice and Empowerment, not a single FIR was registered for violations under the manual scavenging law in 2014. SKA’s ongoing campaigns, including the 2022 nationwide “Stop Killing Us” drive, continue to hold governments accountable. Wilson’s grassroots and legal activism is credited with helping bring down the estimated number of manual scavengers from 30 lakh in 2000 to 6 lakh in 2010 – meaningful progress, but far from a conclusion.

The combined story of Sulabh International and the Safai Karamchari Andolan illustrates what change against deeply entrenched injustice actually looks like – slow, contested, multi-pronged, and never fully complete. Technology dismantles infrastructure. Law shifts accountability. Community mobilisation refuses silence. And yet, for the families of those still working in manholes across India, these remain works in progress rather than achievements to celebrate.

What do you think? If both legislation and legal activism have failed to fully eradicate manual scavenging over three decades, what does that tell us about the relationship between law and social change in India? And do you think technological solutions like the Hope Machine can succeed where legal enforcement has repeatedly fallen short?

References

1. https://www.sulabhinternational.org/our-work/manual-scavengers/
2. https://www.safaikarmachariandolan.org/movement
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manual_scavenging
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulabh_International
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bezwada_Wilson
6. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/6155772/
7. https://m.thewire.in/article/rights/bezwada-wilson-manual-scavenging-law
8. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/2119?sam_handle=123456789/1362
9. https://www.youthkiawaaz.com/2018/12/end-manual-scavenging-in-india/
10. https://idsn.org/a-landmark-judgment-in-the-fight-to-eradicate-manual-scavenging/
11. https://lawbhoomi.com/prohibition-of-employment-as-manual-scavengers-and-their-rehabilitation-act-2013/
12. https://thebetterindia.com/164943/manual-scavenging-hope-machine-sulabh-delhi-news/
13. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1794770
14. https://wagingnonviolence.org/2023/11/india-manual-scavengers-major-legal-victory/