Delhi HC To Examine Constitutional Validity Of Some Provisions Of Prohibition of Employment As Manual Scavengers & Their Rehabilitation Act

The Delhi High Court has issued a notice to Centre as well as the State on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that challenged the constitutional validity of some provisions of Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013.

The petitioner named Kallu had preferred a writ petition against the constitutional validity of Sections 2(1)(g), 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 39 of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 (MS Act) as well as provisions of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Rules, 2013 (MS Rules) as being violative of Articles 14,17, 21, and 23 of the Constitution.

A Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet P.S. Arora directed, “Issue notice. Mr.Jivesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of UOI and Mr.Anupam Srivastava, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of GNCTD. They pray for and are permitted to file their counter affidavits within eight weeks. Rejoinder affidavits, if any, be filed before the next date of hearing.”

Advocate Pawan Reley represented the petitioner while Advocate Jivesh Kumar Tiwari represented the respondents.

The counsel for the petitioner contended that the definition of ‘manual scavengers’ under Section 2(1)(g) of the MS Act is not only manifestly arbitrary but also against the principles of reasonable classification, as it excludes from its purview “sewer cleaners and septic tank cleaners doing hazardous cleaning” inasmuch as they also clean, carry, dispose-off and handle human excreta from dangerous places and further deprives them of the benefit of identification and rehabilitation provided under Sections 11 to 16 of the MS Act read with the MS Rules and other beneficial schemes brought by the Government from time to time.

The counsel further argued that Explanation (a) of Section 2(1)(g) of the MS Act is discriminatory in nature as it only encapsulates regular and contractual employees, to the exclusion of people cleaning excreta on daily wage basis, temporary workers, and Jajmani workers. He also stated that Explanation (b) of Section 2(1)(g) of the MS Act, by excluding persons engaged in cleaning of excreta with the help of protective gear from the definition of ‘manual scavengers’, has deprived them of the benefits pertaining to rehabilitation, scholarships, etc. for which they are equally eligible inasmuch as the nature of work remains the same.

Accordingly, the High Court issued notice and listed the case for the next hearing on July 4, 2024.

Cause Title- Kallu v. Union of India & Anr.

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocates Pawan Reley, Akshay Lodhi, Gaurav Bharatwaj, and Simran Singh.

Respondents: Advocates Jivesh Kumar Tiwari, Samiksha, Anupam Srivastava, and Vasuh Misra.

Click here to read/download the Order