© IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
Manual scavenging remains a harsh reality in India. “I studied commerce and banking, but I couldn’t find work. Even though I am educated, the panchayat hired me to clean toilets because I am from this community,” said Kailash, a man from Maharashtra’s Jalgaon district, as cited in a 2014 Human Rights Watch report.
Kailash belongs to one of Maharashtra’s lower castes, historically associated with the occupation of manual scavenging. His wife, Bimla, added, “We have farming and labour work, but then if I go for farming work I get threats from the panchayat…I am afraid to lose my house.” Threats from the panchayat compel certain castes to remain in menial occupations, with even the police refusing to register their complaints. It is the lowest in the hierarchy who are left to adopt “least desirable and defiling occupations”, as explained by B N Srivastava in Manual Scavenging in India: A Disgrace to the Country (1997).
Ironically, the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993, declared the hiring of manual scavengers and building of dry toilets to be a punishable offence. The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, however, acknowledges a constitutional obligation to correct the historical injustice and indignity endured by manual scavenging communities, aiming to provide alternate livelihoods and comprehensive support, the report notes.
But how rigid is this occupational hierarchy? Who decides the fate of scavengers, and what does ancient Indian literature tell us about the practice of manual scavenging?
From ancient India to the Empire
The International Labour Organization (ILO) describes manual scavenging as the act of cleaning of septic tanks, gutters and sewage lines, and the removal of human waste from public streets and dry latrines. Scholars Nihal Raj, Manish Tiwari and Suyasha Singh Isser (2024), in their journal article From Shadows to Spotlight: Unveiling the Saga of Manual Scavenging in India, argue that the majority of those who engage in manual scavenging are Dalits, of whom women account for 95-98 per cent.
B R Ambedkar, a strong opponent of caste-based discrimination, traced the origins of manual scavenging to 600 BC. One of the earliest references is found in the Naradasamhita, which lists the removal of human excreta as one of the 15 duties for slaves. In Vajasaneyi Samhita, as cited by Srivastava, the Chandals and Paulkasa have been referred to as slaves for the disposal of night-soil or human faeces. In addition to the Samhitas, scholars have also found the Manusmriti endorsing the practice. “The Manusmriti delineates the obligation of those belonging to the untouchable caste to provide service to those of higher castes, without having the right to voice complaints,” opine Raj, Tiwari and Isser. They note that scavengers were typically granted land to build houses as compensation for their services; however, this land could be forfeited if those services were not provided.
The practice persisted, and was observed in the Mauryan Empire as well. Records indicate the presence of scavengers in one of the ancient towns of Pataliputra (now Patna in Bihar).
Interestingly, several scholars trace the institutionalisation of ‘sweeping and scavenging’ as a profession to the advent of Muslim rule in India. The lack of sanitation infrastructure for women observing the purdah compelled them to seek out secluded locations for defecation, necessitating the disposal of waste. This, in turn, led to the employment of war captives to clean latrines, bucket privies, and dispose of night-soil at distant places. These captives, when freed, were not accepted back into society and formed a separate caste – the Bhangis, which continued to practice manual scavenging. This caste, according to sociologist Bindeshwar Pathak in Road to Freedom: A Sociological Study on Abolition of Scavenging in India (1999), was renamed as Mehtar by Emperor Akbar.
According to the 1960 Enquiry Committee on Scavengers, led by N R Malkani, families belonging to the untouchable caste in Hindu society continued to engage in scavenging work despite converting to Islam. “This argument,” according to social activist and writer Gita Ramaswamy in India Stinking: Manual Scavengers in Andhra Pradesh and Their Work (2005), “fits neatly into the Hindutva theory that all social evils emanate from Muslim rule…a narrative [which] consequently downplays the role that caste has played in India.”
The British administration further institutionalised the profession of scavenging in India. Official posts for manual scavenging were created across institutions of the empire, including the railways, military, courts, and industries. The lack of waterborne sewage systems necessitated the hiring of scavengers. At the same time, industrialisation and commercialisation of land had rendered traditional artisan and farming communities unemployed, leading many to take up scavenging. According to the 1931 Census, as cited by Pathak, the total number of scavengers was estimated at 19,57,460, including 10,38,678 males and 9,18,782 females in India.
“This is not to say that the British invented caste or manual scavengers; rather they intervened specifically to institutionalise it,” concludes Ramaswamy.
Further reading:
