Blog

Case Title – Safai Karamchari Andolan Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Case Number – W.P. No. 17380 of 2017; 31345 of 2014 and W.P. (MD) No. 24243 of 2017

Dated on – 29^th April,2024

Quorum – The Hon’ble Chief Justice and Justice J. Sathya Narayana Prasad

FACTS OF THE CASE

In the case of Safai Karamchari Andolan Vs. Union of India & Ors., the Appellants instituted a Writ Petition seeking for the directions against the Respondents to cease the practice of manual scavenging, take Criminal Legal actions against the Respondents in the cases of violations, compensate fully the family of the victims who have attained death due to the manual scavenging, use machines for cleaning the septic tanks, and rigorously implement the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013. Even after assurances from the authorities and the prevailing of the laws prohibiting the manual scavenging, the practice continues due to the entrenched social norms, caste-based discrimination, and systematic failures. The Appellants, in the present case, asserted that the practice of manual scavenging is a staid violation of human rights, eternalizing the cycle of tyranny and discrimination faced by the individuals engaged in this hazardous profession.

CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT

1. The Appellant, through their counsel, in the said case contented for the extermination of manual scavenging and the rehabilitation of scavengers to more decorous job opportunities within Tamil Nadu.
2. The Appellant, through their counsel, in the said case contented that even after the applicability of laws like the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, manual scavenging persists due to systematic failures and social discrimination.

CONTENTIONS OF THE RESPONDENT

1. The Respondent, through their counsel, in the said case contented that they have taken all the requisite steps to prevent manual scavenging, inclusive of the machines for clearing the septic tanks and compensating for death.
2. The Respondent, through their counsel, in the said case contented that the accidents and the deaths concerning the manual scavenging occurred due to the shortcoming of the private contractors and that they have taken all the requisite actions as per law.

LEGAL PROVISIONS

1. Section 2(j) of the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993 prescribes the Definition of the term “Manual Scavengers”
2. Article 23 of the Constitution of India prescribes the Prohibition of human trafficking and forced labour, including begging and similar forms of forced labour
3. Article 23 of the Constitution of India prescribes the Abolishment of Untouchability
4. Article 21 of the Constitution of India prescribes the prescribes the Protection of Life and Personal Liberty

ISSUES

1. The main issue of the case whirls around whether the constant and unending practice of the manual scavenging violates the human rights as well as fundamental rights of the people engaged in the conduction of the manual scavenging?
2. Whether the preventive measures taken by the Respondents are decent to exterminate the manual scavenging and ensure the welfare of the people engaged in the conduction of the manual scavenging?
3. Whether the added instructions from the court are mandatory to address the issues efficiently

COURT ANALYSIS AND JUDGMENT

The court in the case of Safai Karamchari Andolan Vs. Union of India & Ors., acknowledged the tenacious issue of manual scavenging and the impact of it on the fundamental rights as well as the human rights and dignity of the individuals involved in the job of manual scavenging. The court in this case observed the inadequate existing laws and measures to annihilate the manual scavenging efficaciously. The court, in this present case, stressed on the need for the multifarious varied approaches, inclusive of the legislative reforms, social awareness campaigns, and alternative opportunities for the purpose of a better livelihood, to tackle with the issue effectively. The court took into consideration the contentions of both the parties, i.e., the Appellants and the Respondents, and issued a series of guidelines and directions to the Respondent authorities, inclusive of:

• Taking strict actions against those engaging in manual scavenging
• Providing shielding equipment and mechanizing sewer cleaning
• Ameliorating compensation for deaths and injuries concerning the manual scavenging
• Framing schemes for benevolent appointments and rehabilitation of the manual scavengers
• Assuring stringent enactment of the pertinent laws and enervating the workers about the legislative provisions and rehabilitation schemes

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgement Reviewed by – Sruti Sikha Maharana

Click Here to View Judgment