Right to hawking and walking fundamental

In our country, the right to own a vehicle through an ever-obliging credit policy is guaranteed, but the right to earn a living through hawking and vending goods on the streets is not.

The impact of this discrimination has made life difficult for a large section of service providers, who are the backbone of any household. The hawkers look out for a tiny place to sell their wares but civic authorities are determined to deny them that space. The latter’s logic is that the taxpayers’ right to hygienic conditions is far more vital than the rights of millions of people who have to fend for themselves and have no support at all.

In 1989, the Supreme Court had said that economist John Maynard Keynes’ theory, which calls for adopting the policy of full employment, will alleviate the problems of the unemployed to some extent.

But it must be stressed that every human activity has the ‘optimum point’ beyond which it becomes unproductive. There is a need to develop urban centres in rural areas that are removed from each other at least by one hundred miles; secondly, there must be a legislation to enforce the right to employment for vendors and hawkers.

However, there’s some good news now. The central government has been put under judicial command to convert the Model Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Bill, 2009, into an Act by June 30 next year.

The right of hawkers, squatters or vendors to carry on hawking has been recognised as a fundamental right under Article 19(1) (g). At the same time, the right of commuters to move freely and use the roads without any hindrance is a fundamental right under Article 19(1) (d).

These two conflicting rights must be harmonised and regulated by applying reasonable restrictions under law. Just because a section of the working class is unorganised, it doesn’t mean that they should be deprived of the right to earn.