How Swachh Bharat Mission fails to capture the reality of untreated sewage and deadly sanitation labour | Amit Kumar

Introduction:

The Swachh Bharat Mission is widely celebrated as India’s greatest achievement, placing sanitation at the centre of national priorities. Over a decade since its launch in 2014, the mission has reported constructing over 12 crore toilets, expanding access to nearly 100% of urban households and more than 95% of households in rural India.

While the focus on rapidly expanding toilet access, given limited sewer connections, has accelerated the large-scale adoption of on-site sanitation systems, such as septic tanks. The sludge from septic tanks needs to be removed and disposed of periodically, depending on capacity and use. While a larger part of urban households depend on on-site sanitation systems, Faecal Sludge Management (FSM) services are often informal or poorly regulated. A lack of state support has left them with no option but to rely on private firms and, often, manual labour to convey waste for disposal, a hazardous practice outlawed in 2013.

Hazardous working conditions

Both sewer and septic tank cleaning are largely done by a private contracting firm or by employing workers directly. The workers are hired by private firms on a contractual basis, often through verbal agreements, to escape accountability in the event of accidents. The contractor owns or rents a suction machine and is called upon as needed. However, the pressure to complete work quickly and cheaply exposes workers to entering septic tanks without protective gear, and they often become victims of toxic gases. Even with suction machines, the sludge at the bottom often still needs manual cleaning.

Private contracting firms escape accountability for workers’ safety

In case of the death of a worker, the contractor tries to escape accountability by denying the workers as their own. They become liable only when the incident attracts media attention, and the case becomes popular, prompting engagement from social activists and NGOs. Even in those popular cases, the company first tries to deal informally with the victim’s family, offering minimal monetary compensation, and thereby avoids penalisation. In many cases, contractors try to escape liability by threatening victims’ families. Also, contractors further rely on subcontractors or daily wage labourers, forming a chain in which the accountability is diluted at every level.

For example, in October 2022, four workers died while cleaning a sewer on the private hospital premises in Faridabad; three of the workers were daily wage workers, while one was a company worker. After interviewing one of the victim’s family members, it was found that the company was ready to provide monetary compensation to only one worker (registered) while denying it to the other three daily wage workers. It was only when the case caught media attention and the involvement of activists and NGO,s the other three workers were compensated.

Ignorance of safety rules kills!

Often, workers are hired directly by residents to empty septic tanks, without protective equipment. One such incident happened in May 2024 in Noida Sector 24, where two daily wage workers, directly employed by the owner of a private resident lost their lives while cleaning a septic tank.

In response to a question in the Parliament on 17 March 2026 regarding the Prohibition of employment as Manual Scavengers, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment stated that as many as 622 sanitation workers have died due to hazardous cleaning of sewer and septic tanks across India since 2017. Even the Capital city of Delhi witnessed the death of 62 workers. The above data clearly indicate that the safety protocols are being violated on a large scale.

Despite the ODF++ status, Delhi reflects a miserable sanitation system

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi and the New Delhi Municipal Council, which comprise more than 90% of Delhi’s geographical area and population, are ODF++ declared under the SBM. The ODF++ status requires “entire sewage, including faecal sludge and septage (faecal sludge of septic tanks), is safely managed and treated with no open discharge/dumping of untreated sewage, including faecal sludge and septage, in water bodies or open areas. It also mandates mechanised cleaning of sewers and septic tanks and regulated desludging systems as part of its scoring criteria. However, the evidence reveals a very different story.

In March of 2026, the Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) discovered higher levels of faecal coliform in its recent report on the Yamuna River’s water quality. Faecal coliform levels were discovered to be as high as 350,000, which is 44 times the standard and 220 times the desirable limit, despite the safe limit being 2,500 and the desired level being below 500 MPN/100 ml. Such a high level of faecal coliforms indicates that Delhi discharges a significant amount of untreated faecal sludge into the Yamuna River.

Despite a significant expansion in sewage treatment infrastructure from 402 MGD (Million Gallons per Day) in 2001 to about 764 MGD in 2025, the infrastructure gap continues. The actual treatment remains around 650 MGD, for an estimated sewage generation of 800 MGD. Nearly 35% of Delhi’s sewage treatment plants (STPs) have failed to meet water quality norms. This also exposes deeper flaws in the ODF classification framework, raising questions about whether current metrics truly capture the goal of safe disposal of sewage and faecal sludge.

Lacunae of the ODF classification framework

Though protocols for declaring ODF++ mention the treatment and safe disposal of sewage and faecal sludge, they do not specify water-quality criteria for treated sewage before releasing it to the river. Furthermore, the verification process is mainly based on self-declaration, document submission by Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) and limited third-party sample inspections. Assessments rely mainly on sampled locations and photographic evidence, rather than continuous monitoring of waste flows or environmental outcomes. As a result, cities can meet procedural requirements while still allowing large volumes of untreated sewage and septage to enter rivers and drains and the death of workers while cleaning sewer and septic tanks.

Conclusion:

Sewage and faecal sludge management in urban areas is governed by Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) with defined authorities and provisions. However, the underdeveloped sewer connection forces a large section of the urban households to use septic tank system, whose maintenance is private, often involving unsafe desludging operations, which have led to the deaths of workers involved. The private contracting firms involved in both sewer management and septic tank desludging, often with multiple layers of contracts, do not comply with standard procedures and lack accountability.

Though SBM protocols mention mechanised desludging operations and the safe disposal of sewer and faecal sludge, for ODF++ status, the process involved in the verification and declaration of status does not capture the end result, such as capacity and requirement of the sewage treatment plants, the quality of water discharged after treatment and deaths of workers while cleaning sewer and septic tanks. The sample-based one-time inspection by a third party does not capture these outcomes and thus heavily relies on ULB documents, which are mainly self-declarations.

(Author: Amit Kumar, PhD Scholar (Public Health), Dr. BR Ambedkar University Delhi, Email: amit.21[at]stu.aud.ac.in)