Nine Manual Scavenging 9.1 The Commi sion has been deeply concerned about the continuance of the practice of manual handing of night soil in many parts of the country. It had therefore been in touch with the State Governments and the concerned departments of the Central Government on tais matter. Further, in co-ordination with the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis on 6 April 1999, the Commission organised a joint meeting with the competent autho-ities of the Central Government, to chalk out a combined strategy to find ways and means to end this degrading and inhuman practice. 9.2 The meeting was presided over by the then Chairperson of the Commission, Justice M.N. Venkatachaiah. Among those who attended were Shri Ram Jethmalani, the then Minister of Urban Affairs and Employment; Smt Maneka Gandhi, Minister of State for Social Justice and Empowerment, Shri K.M. Muniyappa; Chairperson, National Commission for S^fai Karamcharis and Dr. K. Ramalingam, Member, National Commission for Safai Karamchuris. It was the unanimous view of the participants that the practice of manual handling^of night soil was a major social evil that had to be eradicated. Questions relating to the rdiabilitation of persons engaged in manual scavenging, following the conversion of dry latrines into wet latrines, were also discussed. It was decided to set up a Group consistirg of the Secretaries in the Ministry of Urban Affairs and Employment, Social Justice atil Empowerment, Law and Justice and also a representative of the Planning CommBsion, at an appropriate level, to consider and make recommendations on the following issues: □ Whether a legislation in this matter was outside the competence of the Union Parliament^nd therefore necessitating recourse to the procedure envisaged under Article 252 or whether, in pith and substance, it was encompassed in the legislative field in enjy 24 of List III. □ If the legidation was one under entry 24 of List III, could it, with appropriate amendmerts, be extended to the whole of India without reference to the legislatures of the States? □ Whether rdiabilitation schemes could be funded in States which have not adopted the legislaion.