In a noteworthy stance on urban governance, the Bombay High Court has questioned the disparity in clearing streets and footpaths solely for the Prime Minister and other VVIPs, while neglecting daily upkeep for the general public. Justices M S Sonak and Kamal Khata of the division bench underscored that access to safe and unobstructed footpaths is a fundamental right for all citizens, emphasizing the state’s responsibility to ensure their provision.
The court’s critique targeted the state’s perceived inertia in addressing the persistent issue of unauthorized hawkers encroaching on public spaces, a matter the High Court had taken suo motu cognizance of last year. Despite acknowledging the magnitude of the problem, the bench admonished authorities for using it as a pretext for inaction.
“When VVIPs visit, streets and footpaths are promptly cleared and remain so during their stay. Why can’t this standard be upheld for everyone else?” the bench queried, questioning the fairness of prioritizing certain individuals over the general populace. “Citizens, as taxpayers, deserve clear footpaths and safe walking areas,” they asserted, highlighting the disparity in treatment.
The court reiterated that ensuring safe footpaths is not just a convenience but a basic right, raising poignant questions about civic management and accountability. “We instruct our children to use footpaths, but what guidance can we offer when there are no footpaths left for them to use?” they poignantly asked.
Expressing exasperation with ongoing promises from authorities, the bench demanded concrete action. “The state must act decisively; perpetual pondering without action is unacceptable. Where there’s a will, there’s always a way,” they declared.
The bench also criticized nominal fines imposed on violators, which pale in comparison to their daily earnings. “Your fines mean little to them; they pay and return the next day,” the court remarked, urging the BMC to establish a comprehensive database to identify and prevent repeated violations.
The court proposed beginning a comprehensive sweep, focusing on one street at a time. It highlighted the challenge of identifying offenders, noting their tendency to return due to their difficulty in being traced. The emphasis was on implementing systematic enforcement measures.
The court proposed beginning a comprehensive sweep, focusing on one street at a time. It highlighted the challenge of identifying offenders, noting their tendency to return due to their difficulty in being traced. The emphasis was on implementing systematic enforcement measures.
The case is scheduled for further deliberation on July 22, signaling ongoing judicial scrutiny and a potential catalyst for reform in urban street management practices.
We strive to make a lasting impact on India’s policy and planning landscape through fair, unbiased, and incisive research based journalism.
But we can’t do it alone.
Together, we can create a better India, where policies are fair, planning is unbiased, and the truth prevails. Your contribution matters, and we shall be immensely grateful for your support.