Question

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

Answer 1

• Slum dwellers’ right to livelihood was protected by judgments like Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation in 1985.
• Right to Livelihood was established as the Right to Life as per the judgement of Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation.
• The reach of Article 21 which confers Right to Life is far and wide.
• Life has more meaning than mere existence like an animal.
• Life cannot be simply taken away or extinguished, the award of death sentence or passing the order of execution cannot be done without following due procedures established by the laws.
• This is one dimension of the Right to Life.
• Without a means of livelihood or living, no person will be able to live, this is an important dimension of the right to livelihood.
• In each individual case, a proposition need not be established that means of livelihood will be deprived if people are evicted from a slum or from a pavement.
• The judges observed that people have nowhere else to live if they are evicted from the slums.
• Judges opined that people will lose the job if they are evicted from their slums, as their place of dwelling was close to their location of jobs.
• Hence the judges concluded that eviction of slum dwellers will lead to deprivation of life due to deprivation of their livelihood.