Supreme Court Upholds Right to Unobstructed Footpaths

GS2 – Polity

Context:

The Supreme Court has declared that the right to unobstructed footpaths is a Fundamental Right under Article 21 of the Constitution, viewing it as integral to the right to life and human dignity.

Key Highlights of the Judgement

• Fundamental Right Affirmed:
  The Court reaffirmed the precedent set in Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985), stating that the absence of safe footpaths forces pedestrians onto roads, thereby endangering their lives and violating their fundamental rights.
• Directive to States and UTs:
  All State and Union Territory governments have been directed to frame and implement pedestrian safety guidelines within two months. These must align with the standards set by the Indian Roads Congress (IRC) and the Ministry of Urban Affairs.
• Inclusive Urban Infrastructure:
  Footpaths must be designed to be accessible to persons with disabilities, ensuring safety and usability for all, particularly for vulnerable populations.
• Encroachment Removal:
  The Court ordered authorities to clear illegal encroachments from footpaths to restore their intended use for pedestrian movement.
• Public Authority Accountability:
  Entities like the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), state governments, and municipal bodies are held accountable for creating and maintaining pedestrian-friendly infrastructure.
• Constitution of Road Safety Board:
  Concerned by the delays, the Court instructed the Centre to establish a National Road Safety Board within six months, explicitly barring further extensions.

Broader Context: Road Safety and Emergency Care

This judgment is part of a larger judicial inquiry into the state of road safety infrastructure and the absence of a cashless treatment scheme for accident victims during the critical “golden hour”—the first 60 minutes post-injury when timely medical intervention is crucial.

The Court also criticized the government’s focus on highway expansion without parallel investment in emergency medical infrastructure, highlighting a serious mismatch between infrastructure growth and public safety.

Implications for Governance and Policy

• Expanding Article 21:
  The judgment broadens the interpretation of Article 21 to include urban safety and mobility infrastructure as essential to life and dignity.
• Rights-Based Urban Planning:
  Encourages States to integrate citizen welfare and accessibility into infrastructure planning, particularly for marginalised and vulnerable groups.
• Judicial Advocacy for Inclusive Mobility:
  Reflects the judiciary’s active role in promoting inclusive, equitable, and health-conscious urban development.
• Global Standards Alignment:
  Positions India’s urban development policy closer to international best practices in road safety and sustainable urban planning, endorsing a multi-sectoral governance model.