SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, ARAVIND KUMAR, JJ.
Dr. Balram Singh - Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) No(s). 324 of 2020
Decided On : 20-10-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. historical context of manual scavenging and legislative response. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petition context and lack of implementation. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. previous court directions on manual scavenging. (Para 5) |
| 4. status and operationalization of monitoring committees. (Para 6 , 8) |
| 5. the necessity of implementation of acts related to manual scavenging. (Para 7) |
| 6. arguments for a broader interpretation of rights. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 7. importance of definition scope for manual scavengers. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 8. operational shortcomings of institutions mandated by the act. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 70) |
| 9. rehabilitation processes as essential to the law. (Para 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 10. conclusion and comprehensive directives. (Para 96) |
| 11. call to action for constitutional compliance in eliminating manual scavenging. (Para 97) |
JUDGMENT :
S. Ravindra Bhat, J.
1. The unforgettable annals of our history not only have charted the numerous sacrifices of the people who fought for independence from the foreign imperial ruler but also a lesser-known freedom that for millennia eluded a large mass of people, who were nearly invisible. They were trapped in the thralldom of a solitude from which there was no liberation. That was centuries old stigmatising social practices that led to their depravation, to such levels that they were not even recognised as human beings. Among these practices was one which generations of people, were made to perform the meanest task of manual scavenging. It was to address this kind of social practice and with the resolve to completely out light and emancipate those trapped in it from the thralldom of bondage, that the constitution framers ensured three important provisions, which stare at us like beacons, assuring not only equality but fraternity amongst all people: the prohibition of untouchability; the outlawing of forced or involuntary labour and the freedom against exploitation.
2. To flesh out and give shape to the objects of these provisions, Parliament intervened and enacted several legislations. The first was the CIVIL RIGHTS ACT 1955; its provisions were amended in 1976 to outlaw the practice of untouchability. The penalization of these severe forms with stringent punishment was sought to be achieved by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 which was further strengthened by later amendments. In that ensuring full economic freedom and true emancipation were two enactments, the “Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993” (hereinafter “Act 1993”) and the “Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013” (hereinafter “Act 2013”).
3. The present petition is filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, seeking directions to Respondents (Union of India and all the States and Union Territories) to implement provisions, inter alia, of the Act of 1993 and Act of 2013.
4. In the year 1993, a special Commission for Safai Karamchari was established as per the provisions of National Commission for Safai Karamchari Act, 1993 (hereinafter “NCSK Act”) to give its recommendations to Government regarding specific programmes for the welfare of Safai Karamcharis. In the same year, India took another significant step by prohibiting the employment of manual scavengers responsible for the daily manual emptying of certain types of dry toilets. Subsequently, the Parliament enacted the Act of 2013 which extended and clarified its scope to include insanitary latrines, ditches and pits. However, the petitioner claims that the respondents have not implemented essential provisions of these statutes. Regrettably, manual scavenging persists despite these legislations. Petitioner prayed that Act of 1993 and 2013 should be implemented in letter and spirit and to do so, it is necessary to impose a blanket ban on manual
Legislation prohibits manual scavenging and mandates rehabilitation, yet ineffective implementation led to continued practices; court directed comprehensive measures to ensure adherence and accountab....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of implementing rehabilitation measures for manual scavengers as per the provisions outlined in the relevant Acts.
The court mandated compliance with compensation directives and safety regulations for laborers engaged in hazardous work, emphasizing the state’s duty to protect fundamental rights.
The court mandated strict compliance by the Government with statutory provisions regarding the welfare of sanitation workers, affirming the importance of safeguarding their rights and health, especia....
The court held that principal employers can be held liable under the Atrocities Act for failing to prevent manual scavenging, emphasizing the importance of supervision and safety measures.
GNCTD does not have any other choice except to implement statutory provisions as contained under provisions of Prohibition of Employment As Manual Scavengers And Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013.
The statute mandates timely filing of complaints; failure to comply renders criminal proceedings invalid.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.