A judgement on safe walking as a fundamental right must be welcomed by all and sundry
Many a time one wonders if we really have urban planners in India who understand the basic needs of citizens. And if they exist, are they being listened to by senior bureaucrats and politicians?
The question came to mind when a few people moved the Supreme Court to seek protection of the rights millions of Indian pedestrians. It is shocking enough to Imagine that after about 80 years of independence, India is still asking for basic rights like walking safely on footpaths to be legally protected.
And the apex court immediately handed out a verdict that safe walking was a fundamental right under the Constitution. The court deserves congratulations for thinking of the ‘poor’ people. Poor in that who could not think of a need demand footpath-like basic amenity in burgeoning cities.
When Prime Minister Narendra Modi appealed to the people to lessen their dependence on costly fuel unfortunately, not many people really bothered the firs thought was to share cars or walk more to keep one’s car or two wheeler at home.
I said poor also because a large number of people have neither money nor voice nor age on their side to protect themselves while stepping out of their homes money to engage lawyers or to use money to engage law expensive vehicles!
As Indian cities expand rapidly and everyone from CMs to indus trialists seems focussed on urban lands, it is becoming increasingly difficult to walk around in our already haphazard and crowded cities.
Faulty urban planning is a serious issue faced by citizens of all age groups. There are cities whose Master Plans have been waiting for clearance by political masters for decades. Political masters of the new generation are all busy with family welfare rather than voters welfare. welfare. Readers are aware, I assume, of various land scams involving top politicians.
In such a scenario, a judgement on safe walking as a fundamental right must be welcomed by all and sundry Road fatalities grew with a scary speed of over 20% in a decade from 2015 to 2024, of which some data is available. This does not include the mishaps involving motor vehicles which Union road transport and highways minister Nitin Gadkari has been trying hard to reduce.
I remember when cities were small, their management was far better than today, despite the limited workforce and almost no digitisation. They not only had footpaths at a time when the automobile revolution had not hit Indians, there were better urban governance practices in vogue. Cleaning of roads. safety of pedestrians, functioning of traffic light systems and policing were properly in place. Regional Transport Offices used to conduct practical tests before issuing driving licenses, a system which has literally vanished with changing times.Regional
Why did the Supreme Court have to step in for such a small yet significant directive to be issued after a PIL? The answer is the same as why a PM had to launch a cleanliness drive from the top?
The answer is: Total failure of local bodies and the urban managers.
Issues like cleanliness drives, encroachment removal, pollution control or building and maintaining footpaths are the responsibility of the city administration and urban planner planners. In some states these two essential functions are handled by separate departments, though both activities affect the citizens in a similar measure, if faulty.
When Smart City Mission (SCM) was launched in 2016, an enthusiastic joint secretary in the ministry of housing and urban affairs (MoHUA) in New Delhi had thrown a question at me, among others, at informal chat over a dinner. What all was required for a smart city to be successful? Many of us had spontaneously said that safety was one aspect which had long been neglected and that should be factored in.
Looking back at the now defunct SCM, we all know that none of the 100 cities chosen to be developed into into a a “smart city” reached any where near the set goals of the government. I have no data, but having seen many smart cities up close, I can bet none of them thought of building footpaths for the pedestrians to enjoy walking in their cities.
The rich go to gardens to walk elderly and not to offices. But what about elderly people, daily wage earners, women who can’t drive, the physically disabled and students who wish to go to the market, nearby offices or schools and colleges?
With the new SC ruling, one only hopes that the urban administration departments of the state governments and the MoHUA will now think seriously about ensuring the right of pedestrians to safe walking. We are in 2026, by the way!