·The Hindu·15 marks·250–350 words

Mechanisation alone cannot end caste-linked sanitation work. Comment, with reference to the NAMASTE scheme.

New · District CollectorCan you hold the district for 72 hours?Floods, a heatwave, an outbreak, a grievance queue. Take the decisions, see the consequences.Play →
In this answer
  1. What NAMASTE's mechanisation achieves
  2. Why machines alone fall short
  3. Way forward

Section 7 of the PEMSR Act, 2013 bans employing anyone for hazardous cleaning of sewers and septic tanks [1]. Even so, 332 workers died doing this work across 18 States/UTs between January 2021 and June 2026 [2]. The NAMASTE scheme tries to replace hands with machines. The statement is largely valid because the problem is social and administrative as well as technical.

What NAMASTE's mechanisation achieves

  • Safety by design: The scheme was launched to end unsafe sewer and septic-tank cleaning by mechanising these operations [3].
  • Worker identification: 89,915 sewer and septic tank workers have been validated. They receive PPE kits and Ayushman Bharat health cover [4].
  • From labourer to entrepreneur: A capital subsidy for sanitation machinery lets workers and their groups run cleaning services themselves [4].

Why machines alone fall short

  • Caste concentration: 67.91% of validated workers are from Scheduled Castes [5]. Yet the government calls the work "occupation-based rather than caste-based" [5], which weakens caste-sensitive rehabilitation. If the same communities run the jetting machines, the occupation stays caste-coded. This conflicts with Article 17 and the dignity guaranteed under Article 21.
  • Weak enforcement: Only 193 FIRs were registered in five years despite repeated deaths [2]. The NHRC still had to take suo motu cognizance of sewer-chamber deaths in Indore (2026) [6].
  • Outsourcing gaps: Civic bodies subcontract much of this work, which blurs liability. Dr. Balram Singh v. Union of India (2023) extended duties to outsourced work and raised compensation to ₹30 lakh for each death [7].
  • Narrow coverage: The scheme counts validated workers. It does not secure alternative livelihoods or education for the next generation.

Way forward

  • Link NAMASTE to skilling, education and jobs outside sanitation for workers' families.
  • Fix principal-employer liability on civic bodies and private premises, and pay compensation within set deadlines as Balram Singh requires [7].
  • Publish death and prosecution data openly every year, and run social audits of mechanisation [2].

Machines can remove the body from the sewer, but they cannot remove caste from the occupation. NAMASTE is a necessary base. It must be paired with firm enforcement, real social mobility and the Constitution's promise of dignity. Only then can SDG 6 and the vision of Article 17 be achieved.

Sources

  1. 1Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 (India Code)Section 7 ban on hazardous cleaning
  2. 2PIB: 332 Sanitation Worker Deaths Reported in 18 States, UTs Due to Hazardous Sewer and Septic Tank Cleaning Between January 2021 and June 2026332 deaths; 193 FIRs; NCSK death data
  3. 3PIB: NAMASTE scheme to eradicate unsafe sewer and septic-tank cleaning practices introduced by MoSJEscheme objective of mechanisation
  4. 4PIB: NAMASTE Scheme: Ensuring Safety and Dignity for Sanitation Workers89,915 validated workers; PPE kits, Ayushman cover, capital subsidy
  5. 5PIB: Parliament Question – Welfare and Profiling of Sewer and Septic Tank Workers67.91% SC share; "occupation-based, not caste-based" stance
  6. 6PIB: NHRC takes suo motu cognizance of death of two municipal sanitation workers in a sewer chamber in Indore, Madhya Pradeshcontinuing deaths despite the ban
  7. 7Supreme Court of India: Dr. Balram Singh v. Union of India, W.P.(C) 324/2020, judgment dated 20 Oct 2023duties covering outsourced work; ₹30 lakh compensation

More from this note