From the Sewer to the System: How India Reduced Manual Scavenging

In the dark, exposing workers to deadly gases, disease, narrow drains and septic tanks filled with human waste, where even the ray of light doesn’t reach, the people are forced to risk their lives every day. Manual scavenging is banned by law, yet it continues across India. People work without safety, dignity, or choice, trapped by caste and poverty in a job that has been illegal for decades, while society and the system fail to fully end this inhuman practice.

For decades, certain images defined India’s sanitation reality. Men descending into the open sewer lines without the protective gear; these images were not exceptions but a routine outcome of caste-based sanitation governance. These visuals were not isolated tragedies; they represented, in fact, a deeper story of caste injustice, administrative neglect, and technological backwardness. 

Introduction

Manual scavenging was not merely a sanitation practice but a symbol of how the state failed its most vulnerable citizens. Today, such visuals are far less frequent. Their decline does not even mean the problem has disappeared, but it does indicate a significant structural transition in how India approaches sanitation governance, 2014 onwards. 

Manual scavenging cannot be understood merely as a sanitation failure; it is rooted in the graded caste hierarchy that historically assigned “polluting labour” to Dalit communities. Scholars like Dr B.R. Ambedkar repeatedly argued that dignity cannot coexist with hereditary occupation. Even after legal abolition, caste networks within municipalities ensured that the same communities continued to be informally recruited for hazardous sanitation work. The technological turn after 2014 is significant precisely because it challenges this caste logic by breaking the assumed link between sanitation and human bodies.

The government has officially admitted that 453 people have died while cleaning sewers since 2014, as reported by the Hindustan Times in 2024 , and the figures were also shared by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment in a written reply in the Lok Sabha. Each of these deaths is a very stark reminder that progress remains incomplete. Yet, it is equally important to recognise that during this period, manual scavenging has shifted from being an accepted and invisible practice to one that is legally prohibited, technologically replaceable, and also administratively monitored. The story of this decade is not about denial of persistence, but about the nature of the transition underway.

Historical Context: Laws vs Reality

Before 2014, India already had laws prohibiting manual scavenging. The Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act of 1993 and the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act of 2013 clearly outlawed the practice. However, these laws remained largely ineffective on the ground, where the urban local bodies lacked the modern sanitation machinery and relied heavily on contractual labour. Sewer cleaning almost invariably meant human entry into hazardous spaces. Municipalities operated with limited technical capacity and protective gear, while caste-based informal hiring still continued unchecked. Rehabilitation existed mostly on paper, without systematic funding, monitoring, or accountability as well.

One of the most critical failures of the pre-2014 period was the absence of credible data. Government surveys often under-reported the number of manual scavengers, as many of the states denied their existence altogether to avoid the legal and financial responsibility. Deaths inside the sewers were very often routinely labelled as “accidents” rather than recognised as violations of the law. As a result, manual scavenging remained officially invisible even while it persisted widely.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that deaths in sewers are not “accidents” but violations of fundamental rights under Article 21. In Safai Karamchari Andolan v. Union of India, the Court mandated zero manual scavenging and compensation for sewer deaths, reinforcing that administrative convenience cannot override human dignity.

Beyond the right to life under Article 21, manual scavenging also violates Article 14 (equality before law) and Article 17 (abolition of untouchability). Continued sewer deaths expose not only administrative failure but constitutional failure. Recognising this expands the issue from welfare to enforceable rights

2014 Onwards: Recognition and Mapping

The period after 2014 marks a noticeable shift, not because the problem suddenly vanished, but definitely because the state began to formally acknowledge its existence. Instead of asking whether manual scavenging existed, the policy discourse shifted towards identifying where it existed, why the human entry into sewers continued, and how machines could replace manual labour. This change in approach laid the foundation for more systematic intervention.

One of the most important developments during this period has been district-level mapping. According to the data from the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, out of 766 districts in the country, 732 have now been declared manual scavenging-free as of 2023–24. This outcome was only achieved through nationwide surveys, geo-tagging of insanitary latrines, and mandatory reporting by district magistrates. Compared to the pre-2014 era, when data itself was unreliable or absent, the creation of digitised and district-mapped records represents a very significant administrative shift.

Policy Interventions: Swachh Bharat & NAMASTE

Government schemes played a central role in driving this transition. The Swachh Bharat Mission, often associated primarily with toilet construction, had a deeper impact on sanitation infrastructure modernisation. The programme approved ₹371 crore specifically for the eradication of manual scavenging, facilitated conversion of the insanitary latrines, and expanded sewer networks, thereby reducing the reliance on open drains. Importantly, the mission reframed sanitation as an issue of dignity and technology rather than caste-based labour.

A major policy turning point came with the launch of the NAMASTE scheme in 2023, or the National Action for Mechanised Sanitation Ecosystem. This scheme explicitly aims at eliminating the human entry into the sewers by ensuring complete mechanisation of the hazardous cleaning. It also systematically focuses on deploying sewer jetting machines, suction machines, and robotic equipment, while simultaneously training sanitation workers as machine operators. The scheme also provides personal protective equipment, insurance coverage, and creates a digital database of the sanitation workers. NAMASTE represents a clear acknowledgement that welfare measures alone are insufficient and that technology is central to ending manual scavenging.

Workshops and Capacity‑Building for Hazardous Cleaning – Under SRMS/NAMASTE, the government conducts workshops on hazardous sewer and septic tank cleaning under the umbrella of SRMS and now NAMASTE to inform sanitation workers and municipal stakeholders about safety protocols, mechanisation methods and workers’ rights. These workshops aim to institutionalise safety standards and expand awareness among sanitation workers about transitioning to mechanised work and about their legal entitlements, a shift from previous periods when such capacities were largely absent. 

For sanitation workers themselves, mechanisation represents not only safety but social mobility. Training programs under NAMASTE that reclassify workers as machine operators and technicians help dismantle the stigma associated with sanitation labour. However, resistance remains where contractors fear higher costs and workers fear job loss, highlighting the need for trust-based transition policies.

Rehabilitation and Economic Empowerment

Alongside this, the Self-Employment Scheme for Rehabilitation of Manual Scavengers was reoriented after 2014 to emphasise skill development, capital subsidies for alternative livelihoods, and Direct Benefit Transfer mechanisms. The focus shifted from the symbolic rehabilitation to facilitating a permanent economic exit from caste-bound sanitation work. This marked an important departure from the earlier approaches that failed to break this occupational continuity.

The most visible change on the ground during this period has been the increasing presence of the machines where all humans once worked. Sewer jetting machines, suction-cum-jetting vehicles, robotic manhole cleaners, and AI-enabled sewer inspection robots have been deployed across several states. 

Incentives & Innovation: SSC and NSKFDC

The SafaiMitra Suraksha Challenge was launched by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA) on World Toilet Day, 19 November 2020, to prevent hazardous cleaning of sewers and septic tanks and promote mechanisation nationwide. The policy aims to encourage cities and urban local bodies to transition from manual to mechanised sewer/septic tank cleaning, thereby eliminating human entry in dangerous spaces. As part of this challenge, over 243 cities pledged to mechanise cleaning operations by 30 April 2021, and a dedicated helpline was established to address emergency desludging and unsafe cleaning issues. The scheme also launched guidelines for training sanitary workers, equipment standards for mechanised cleaning, and capacity‑building modules under the Swachh Bharat 

SSC is significant because it added an incentive‑based, competitive approach to municipal sanitation governance, framing zero fatalities as a measurable outcome rather than a vague target. By coupling mechanisation benchmarks with citizen awareness and helpline redressal, SSC marks a policy shift from reactive welfare to proactive risk prevention. It also strengthens collaboration between urban bodies and the central government’s sanitation machinery, signalling that elimination of manual entry must be integrated into urban sanitation planning rather than treated as an ancillary objective. However, its challenge framework may still struggle without uniform enforcement and funding across states, and gaps in ULB capacities can lead to uneven uptake. 

National Safai Karamcharis Finance & Development Corporation (NSKFDC) Programmes – Ongoing since 1997 although not a single “scheme,” NSKFDC (set up in January 1997) under the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment functions as the nodal agency for socio‑economic rehabilitation of manual scavengers, Safai Karamcharis, sewer/septic tank workers and their dependants. It provides financial assistance, concessional loans, training, microcredit and enterprise support to transition target groups into dignified livelihoods. Its programme portfolio includes:

• Swachhta Udyami Yojana (SUY) – supports procurement of sanitation‑related equipment and vehicles to aid mechanised cleaning;

• Sanitary Marts Scheme – credit to set up sanitation product/service enterprises;

• Education Loan and Skill Development Training – financial support for education and vocational skill building;

• Mahila Samridhi & Mahila Adhikarita Yojana – women‑focused financial schemes to encourage self‑employment and entrepreneurship among women from sanitation households. 

NSKFDC operates at the intersection of rehabilitation and economic empowerment, recognising that mechanisation alone cannot end caste‑linked sanitation labour unless workers have alternative and sustainable incomes. By financing up‑skilling, business ventures, vehicles and sanitation‑related services, NSKFDC tackles the deep‑rooted economic dependency on hazardous work. However, while NSKFDC interventions are necessary for long‑term livelihood change, they often depend on state‑level implementation and vary substantially in reach highlighting the need for stronger monitoring and streamlined rollout. 

Capacity Building and Robotics

Training and capacity‑building represent an important behavioural policy instrument that accompanies hardware (machines) with soft skills, enabling workers not just to access technologies but to use them safely and assert their occupational rights. It also enhances municipal administrative capacities to adopt safer practices and reduces dependency on middleman contractors who resist change.

Alongside conventional mechanised equipment, several robotic systems have been developed and deployed in India to eliminate the need for human entry into hazardous sewer spaces. A prominent example is “Bandicoot”, engineered by the Kerala-based startup Genrobotics; it is recognised as one of the world’s first robotic manhole cleaning machines, designed to enter narrow sewage chambers, remove solid waste via an articulated arm and bucket system, and operate remotely, thereby keeping workers out of dangerous environments. 

Bandicoot has been adopted by municipal corporations in multiple states and has been credited with reducing manual exposure and improving safety while also creating opportunities for sanitation workers to be trained as machine operators rather than manual cleaners. Other robotic innovations, such as the Sewer Croc robotic arm and SEPoy septic tank robot developed by Indian researchers, further demonstrate the expanding technological ecosystem aimed at ending manual scavenging through automation and worker reskilling.

Uttar Pradesh, for instance, has introduced the robotic cleaning systems in cities such as Lucknow and Noida, while municipal corporations increasingly require the written justification for any manual sewer entry. This technological substitution explains why the disturbing visuals that once dominated the public consciousness have become less common. The work has not disappeared; it has actually been transformed.

Globally, several countries have successfully eliminated human entry into sewers through strict mechanisation, occupational safety regulations, and urban planning. For instance, Japan and Germany mechanised all hazardous sanitation tasks decades ago, using sewer-cleaning robots, CCTV monitoring, and specialised machines, alongside strict enforcement of labour safety laws. These countries also institutionalised training and certification for sanitation workers, ensuring dignity, skill development, and permanent alternative livelihoods. Municipal inspections and public reporting ensured accountability, making unsafe manual cleaning virtually nonexistent.

India has adopted some of these measures as illustrated above, but the gaps remain in uniform enforcement, worker-centric training, and independent monitoring. Adopting global best practices such as mandatory third-party safety audits, certified mechanised training programs, and continuous monitoring of sewer fatalities could accelerate India’s transition. Additionally, linking mechanisation targets with municipal funding and urban planning, similar to Japan’s integrated approach, could help ensure zero human entry into sewers nationwide.

Also unlike many developed countries, India’s sanitation crisis intersects with caste, informality, and rapid urbanisation. Sewer systems expand faster than municipal capacity, and informal settlements often lack mapped infrastructure. This makes enforcement uneven and creates grey zones where manual entry still occurs. Mechanisation alone cannot succeed unless urban planning, labour formalisation, and caste-sensitive governance move together.

However, the continued occurrence of the deaths underscores persistent structural failures. Contractors often bypass the safety norms, emergency cleaning situations still force human entry, and accountability at the municipal level still remains weak. The judiciary has repeatedly clarified that any death inside a sewer constitutes violation of law rather than an accident. The challenge today is not the absence of policy, but gaps in its enforcement, monitoring, and responsibility fixation.

When viewed comparatively, the contrast between the pre-2014 and post-2014 periods is evident. Earlier, data was denied or missing, technology was minimal, accountability was diffused, rehabilitation remained symbolic, and manual scavenging was socially normalised. Between 2014 and 2025, data has become digitised and district-mapped, and mechanisation has also expanded rapidly. Courts and Parliament actively monitor this issue, rehabilitation is increasingly linked to the training, skilling and direct transfers, and the practice has actually become socially and legally unacceptable.

This transition matters because manual scavenging has always been more than sanitation work; it represents the structural caste violence embedded in governance systems. Reducing it contributes to breaking of the hereditary occupations, restoring dignity of labour, and aligning sanitation with modern administrative standards. India’s progress in this area is therefore not merely cosmetic, but reflective of a deeper policy shift from tolerance to absolutely zero-acceptance.

Remaining Challenges and Policy Gaps

Despite this progress, several policy gaps remain. Stronger legal enforcement is essential, including fixing the responsibility on municipal officials and treating sewer deaths as serious service violations. Mechanisation must become non-negotiable across all urban local bodies and linked to financial incentives through the central grants. The transition must remain worker-centric, focusing on reskilling sanitation workers as technicians and providing psychological rehabilitation alongside economic support. Finally, the creation of an independent sanitation safety regulator, similar to occupational safety authorities in developed countries, could institutionalise accountability through inspections and public safety dashboards.

Success should be measured through clear indicators: zero human sewer entry certificates verified by third parties, year-on-year reduction in sewer deaths to absolute zero, percentage of sanitation workers transitioned into skilled roles, and public dashboards tracking mechanisation across cities. Without measurable outcomes, policy intent risks remaining symbolic.

Conclusion: From Hazard to Hope

The decline in horrifying visuals does not mark the end of responsibility. It reflects a shift in how sanitation is governed, mechanised, and socially perceived as well. India has shown that manual scavenging is not inevitable; it is a governance failure and therefore solvable. The journey from the sewer to the system has begun, but justice will be achieved only when sanitation no longer costs lives, dignity, or caste-bound futures.