Mumbai: The Bombay High Court recently observed that the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) was defeating the purpose of footpaths, which is to ensure smooth passage of traffic and to make available a safe path for pedestrians, by permitting stalls to come up in the middle of such walkways.
A division bench of Justices Sunil Shukre and MW Chandwani, on February 1, asked the BMC to consider the entire issue of permitting erection of 11 stalls on a footpath situated outside a hospital at Worli in central Mumbai.
The HC was hearing a plea filed by NGO, Bombay Mothers and Children Welfare Society, Dr Tilak Hospital at Dr G M Bhosale Marg, Worli, challenging the corporation’s decision. Advocates Satish Borulkar and Siddhesh Borulkar, appearing for the petitioner, submitted a 2004 Supreme Court judgement in the Maharashtra Ekta Hawkers Union vs BMC case and said there is a prohibition on hawking within 100 meter of any hospital and also places such as temples, holy shrines, or other places of worship and educational institutions.
BMC argues prohibition only applicable to hawkers not stall owners
BMC advocate, Anoop Patil, however, argued that the prohibition was applicable to hawkers and not on stall owners. The civic body further contended that its executive engineer, Maintenance, G/South Ward had granted permission for the erection of these stalls on the basis of the No-Objection Certificate (NOC) issued by the State Government.
The high court said it would examine this issue, but noted that there was an issue regarding proper use of footpaths which are meant for pedestrians and not for anybody to carry out their business.
Court: BMC prima facie acting against public interest
“If the corporation permits any stall owner to erect the stall on the footpath, then the corporation is prima facie acting against public interest as it causes obstructions to the pedestrians and resultantly the pedestrians would be forced to use the road for walking, thereby endangering their own lives and also lives of the occupants of the vehicles which are plying on the road,” the court said.
It further added: “When footpaths are constructed, their purpose is to allow smooth passage of vehicles or traffic on the one hand and making available to the pedestrians a safe path to traverse distance by walking. This very purpose, in our opinion, is prima facie getting defeated at the hands of the Corporation by permitting erection of stalls right in the middle of the footpath.”
