Revision summary
Untouchability is practised exclusion on grounds of hereditary pollution, abolished in Article 17 but not in social geography. Forms include water, food, temple, housing, school and marriage bans. Manual scavenging continues despite the 2013 Act. Urban cups, sewers and housing filters are contemporary illustrations. Guru’s humiliation and Ambedkar’s annihilation agenda still describe the structure.
Model answer
Copper italics in this answer — like this — are the key facts. Each one is unpacked in the Facts & figures rail.
Introduction
Untouchability is the social practice of treating persons as polluting to touch, well, temple, kitchen or neighbourhood because of hereditary rank. Article 17 abolished it. The Protection of Civil Rights Act and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act criminalise it. B. R. Ambedkar and Gopal Guru insist it is still a lived geography of humiliation. Forms have shifted from the village well to the urban housing society and the sanitation contract.
Body
Classic and continuing forms
- Water and food: separate tumblers in some teashops, refusal of shared utensils, and exclusion from village tanks still appear in field reports from Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and northern states. Temple and ritual: barred entry, separate queues, and denial of priesthood. Occupation: hereditary assignment of leather, sanitation and death work; manual scavenging continues despite the PEMSR Act, 2013. Residence: Dalit hamlets at the edge, urban ghettoes, and housing-society filters. School: seating, mid-day meal serving, and teacher prejudice. Marriage: the sharpest closure; inter-caste couples face violence.
Newer illustrations
Urban anonymity does not end caste. Domestic workers may have separate cups. Matrimonial sites hide filters that are untouchability’s cousin. Sanitation workers died in sewers in Delhi and other cities while municipalities outsourced the stigma. During droughts, water-tanker access can reproduce the well. In campuses, mess and hostel discrimination recurs. Guru’s language of humiliation names the everyday, not only the riot.
- Untouchability today is therefore legal-illegal: forbidden and practised. Illustrations should stay tied to water, food, worship, work, housing and marriage—the same axes Ghurye listed as disabilities, now in new settings.
Flow diagram
Conclusion
Untouchability is still practised as exclusion from water, food, temples, housing, honourable work and marriage, with manual scavenging as its stark occupational form. Law abolished the status; social geography keeps the practice. Urban and digital life recast it more than they erase it.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Analyse the differences between the attributional and interactional approach in studying the caste system
Next question on this syllabus topic (2023 · Q1(c)). View answer →
-
Is untouchability only a village practice?
No. Housing, domestic work, sanitation contracts and campuses reproduce it in cities.
-
Is occupational change enough?
Leaving a stigmatised job helps one household. The stigma can follow people into new work and marriage markets.
Same topic · past papers
UPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.
-
2017 · Q1(c) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
What are the distinct features of islam as practised in India, and how have they changed over time ? -
2022 · Q2(b) · Sociology GS 2 · 15 marks
Elaborate on changing nature of caste system with suitable illustrations. -
2025 · Q5(a) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
'The transfer of land from cultivating to the non-cultivating owners is bringing about transformation in Indian society.' Justify your answer by giving suitable illustrations. -
2023 · Q3(c) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Critically examine the concept of Sanskritization with suitable illustrations -
2020 · Q4(a) · Sociology GS 2 · 20 marks
Discuss the conceptual issues about lineage and descent in India. Give suitable illustrations ,
More from this topic
Q5(d) · UPSC Mains 2026 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks · Solution
How do Louis Dumont and André Beteille differ in their approaches in understanding caste system in India? Explain.
Caste System
Louis Dumont and André Beteille offer contrasting paradigms for studying the Indian caste system. Dumont applies a structuralist-ideological approach, viewing caste as a hierarchical system governed by the religious principle of purity and pollution, derived from classical texts. Conversely, Beteille adopts an empirical-sociological approach, focusing on village-level realities in Tamil Nadu to demonstrate how caste, class, and power often diverge, reflecting secular social stratification. While Dumont sees caste as an integrated whole of structural values, Beteille emphasizes structural pluralism and social mobility. Understanding both theorists is essential for analyzing the continuity and transformation of social inequality in contemporary India.
Q2(c) · UPSC Mains 2024 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks · Solution
What, according to Andre Beteille, are the bases of agrarian class structure in India? Analyse
Caste System
Béteille based agrarian class on land property and labour, not on caste rank. Owners, tenants and agricultural labourers are the main classes in his Tanjore study. Caste, class and power are three interacting dimensions. Ownership, control and labour remain the operational bases. Corporate farming, reverse tenancy and public works modify the actors without cancelling the scheme.
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2024 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks · Solution
What, according to you, are the factors responsible for the continuance of caste system in India? Explain.
Caste System
Caste continues as organisation and ideology, not only as village custom. Ambedkar’s endogamy, Dumont’s hierarchy, and Ghurye’s features still describe marriage, food and stigma. Srinivas showed mobility inside caste; Béteille and Desai linked it to land, class and power. The Constitution and reservations recast caste as a political identity rather than simply erasing it. Markets and cities loosened occupation more than they loosened kinship.