Question

Re-read excerpts from the judgement on the Olga Tellis v Bombay Municipal Corporation case.
Now write in your own words what the judges meant when they said that Right to Livelihood was a part of Right to Life.

Answer 1

Hint: The Olga Tellis v Bombay Municipal Corporation was a case brought before the Supreme Court of India in 1985. It came before the Supreme Court as a writ petition against the state of Maharashtra and the Bombay Municipal Corporation who sought to evict pavement and slum dwellers in Mumbai.

Complete Step by Step answer: The writ petition was first filed in the High Court of Bombay in 1981 for an order of injunction restraining the officers of the State Government and the Bombay Municipal Corporation from implementing the directive issued by the Chief Minister for the eviction of pavement and slum dwellers. The writ petition was filed in the Supreme Court in 1985 on the grounds that the eviction process of the Bombay Municipal Corporation was violative of Articles 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution. In 1985, the Supreme Court’s unanimous judgement by a five bench judge under the Chief Justice Y.V Chandrachud stated that there can be no renunciation of the fundamental rights. The court observed that the word ‘life’ in Article 21 included the right to livelihood and that if the right to livelihood was not treated as a part of the constitutional right to life then the easiest way of depriving a person of their right to life would be to deprive them of their means of livelihood. The inhabitants of the causeway were evicted without relocation.

Note: Article 21 provides every person with the right to life and personal liberty. Over the years, the ambit and meaning of the right to life have been expanded by judicial interpretations.