The Supreme Court of India, on December 11, 2024, issued an unequivocal reaffirmation of its judicial mandate concerning the eradication of manual scavenging and the enforcement of statutory safeguards under 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. Seized of a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, the Court censured the persistent dereliction of duties by statutory authorities in implementing the welfare provisions of these legislations.

A bench comprising Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Aravind Kumar expressed its pronounced discontent over the inertia exhibited by the executive apparatus. Justice Dhulia emphasized the gravity of the issue, remarking, “This is a question of human dignity. Let me tell you, we will go to any extent to ensure compliance with the order, come what may.” The Court observed that its earlier directives issued on October 20, 2023, had remained substantially unimplemented, reflecting a disregard for both legislative intent and judicial mandate.

The Court noted with disapproval the inadequacy of the Union Government’s compliance affidavit, terming it “not encouraging at all.” It was highlighted that critical directions, including the conduct of a nationwide survey on manual scavenging and the constitution of district-level survey committees, had not been complied with. Amicus Curiae, Senior Advocate K. Parameshwar, apprised the Court that several states had failed to constitute statutory committees such as the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis, State Monitoring Committees, and Vigilance Committees. The non-convening of the Central Monitoring Committee over a four-year period was also brought to the Court’s attention, further underscoring systemic failures.

The Court’s October order had issued comprehensive directions mandating the eradication of manual sewer cleaning through phased implementation, the framing of policies by the Union Government, and adherence by all States and Union Territories. Furthermore, the Court had directed the payment of enhanced compensation of ₹30 lakhs for sewer deaths, alongside full rehabilitation measures for affected families, including employment for next of kin and educational support for dependents. Despite the unequivocal nature of these orders, the Court observed, “Most of the directions given in order dated 20.10.2023 have not been complied with.”

During the proceedings, the Amicus disclosed that over 40 sewer deaths had been reported in 2024 alone, with no First Information Reports (FIRs) registered. Justice Dhulia categorically asserted, “This has to be registered under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. It is abetment to suicide.” Justice Kumar, reflecting on the plight of affected families, remarked, “These families are voiceless. Why is the Director General of Police not acting on these cases?” The Court asserted the critical need to affix legal accountability on individuals and entities responsible for such violations, particularly in instances where hazardous cleaning is performed in contravention of statutory prohibitions.

In view of the alarming lack of compliance, the Additional Solicitor General, Aishwarya Bhati, proposed convening a meeting of the Central Monitoring Committee along with representatives of State Monitoring Committees within two weeks. Accepting this suggestion, the Court directed that the Union Government file a detailed affidavit elucidating the extent of compliance with its directions, the reasons for non-compliance, and a state-wise breakdown of progress. The Court mandated that the affidavit comprehensively address all directives outlined in its October order, including the establishment of a centralized portal to systematically monitor sewer deaths, track compensation disbursements, and document rehabilitation efforts.

The Court also directed to consider employing technological advancements to completely eradicate manual scavenging and hazardous cleaning. It observed with concern that despite significant progress in technology, “little progress has been made in this field.” The judiciary stressed the need for stringent enforcement of accountability mechanisms, including the imposition of monetary liabilities and the cancellation of contracts where agencies engage in prohibited practices.

The Court’s observations reflect a profound commitment to the constitutional values of dignity and equality. By directing rigorous enforcement of the statutory framework and holding the executive accountable, the judiciary has reaffirmed its role as the guardian of fundamental rights. As Justice Dhulia noted, “This Court will not abandon these families. We will ensure compliance, come what may.” The matter has been adjourned to January 29, 2025, for further consideration of compliance efforts and the implementation of judicial directives.

Case Title: DR. BALRAM SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Case No: W.P.(C) No. 324/2020

Bench: Justice Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Aravind Kumar