Mumbai: The State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) has taken suo-motu cognizance of a published news article highlighting the encroachment of S.V. Road by hawkers. A cognisance had taken on to how the hawkers have illegally occupied the road, forcing BEST, the public transport service, to divert its routes. This diversion has caused significant inconvenience to local residents.
The commission, presided over by Justice K.K. Tated and M.A. Sayeed, has directed the Mumbai Police Commissioner, the General Manager of BEST, and the Joint Commissioner of Police (Traffic) to file responses on the issue. In its order, the SHRC instructed the authorities to answer specific questions, including:
1. Is S.V. Road intended solely for hawkers or for public use and transportation as well?
2. Why have the authorities failed to take action to clear the encroachments on the road?
3. Is it true that BEST routes 244, 246, and 277 have been disrupted due to the presence of hawkers?
4. What measures will the concerned authorities take to clear the road and restore it for public use?
The SHRC has asked the authorities to submit an affidavit addressing these concerns before the commission.
In its order, the SHRC stated that the news report indicates the entire S.V. Road has been encroached upon by hawkers, making it difficult to discern whether the road was constructed for public use or solely for vendors.
Due to these illegal encroachments, BEST has been forced to divert its bus routes—specifically routes 244, 246, and 277—causing inconvenience to commuters. “This is a blatant violation of the human rights of many residents in the area,” the commission noted.
The order further referenced the article’s claim that local residents have repeatedly filed complaints with the authorities, but no action has been taken.
The SHRC also expressed concern over a statement reportedly made by the Additional Municipal Commissioner of the ‘R’ Central Ward, who allegedly claimed that the lack of manpower made it impossible to clear the encroachments. The commission criticized this response, emphasizing that it is the civic body’s duty to ensure public roads remain free from illegal encroachments.
