WWW.LIVELAW.IN
CWPIL No.6 of 2017 19.05.2017
Mr. Deven Khanna, Advocate, as Amicus Curiae.
.P .
Present:
of H
Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General, with Mr. Anup Rattan & Mr. Romesh Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, and Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents.
While dealing with the FAO No.200 of 2016, one of us (Sanjay Karol, ACJ) called the status report qua the availability of
ou rt
various sanitary facilities, if any, on the National/State Highways in the State of Himachal Pradesh. Pursuant to the direction issued by this Court, the Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal
C
Pradesh, convened a meeting of concerned Departments, which included Transport Department, Public Works Department, Rural
h
Development Department and the Deputy Commissioners on 18th
ig
March, 2017. 2
By way of aforesaid report, it came to the notice of the
H
Court that approximately 5000 buses daily ply on the roads, be it National Highway and State Highway in the State of Himachal Pradesh. This Court after taking note of the fact that no public conveniences are available on the aforesaid Highways passed following order:“ This Court is informed that on a broad estimate, more than 500 buses daily ply in the State of Himachal Pradesh. Shockingly, on the Highways, there are not public conveniences available. The hardship, which the passengers, so travelling in a public transport, in particular ladies and children, suffer undoubtedly, is immense and painful. In fact, agonizing. The agony of the local residents is compounded with the influx of transitory tourist population, which also is in huge number. In view of ever expanding definition of right to life, whether a citizen is entitled to civic
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 2
of H
.P .
amenities, during the course of his travel, which he undertakes, by whatsoever mode of transport, on the State/National Highways, is an issue which has arisen for consideration. It is matter of vital public importance and significance. In the social context justice, conflict, if any, of rights of all concerned, needs to be examined. As such, the status report itself be considered as a petition. Accordingly, the matter be placed on the administrative side for consideration”.
3
In the aforesaid background, instant matter came to be
treated as Public Interest Litigation by the Principle Division Bench of
ou rt
this Court. While issuing notice to the respondents/State of Himachal Pradesh, this Court appointed Mr. Devan Khanna, Advocate, as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court. A
judgment
by
an
Indian
Court
provided
the
C
4
jurisprudential basis and set a new nominative standard which were
h
adopted by the united nation. It was quoted in the UN reports that “
ig
the case of Ratlam Municipal Council v. Shri Vardhichand & Others, Supreme Court of India, AIR 1980 SC 1622 is perhaps
H
the strongest piece of jurisprudence on the legal rights to sanitation. The Courts decision ruled against the “municipality’s failure to provide basic public conveniences and asserted that the human need that leads to open defecation means ‘bashfulness becomes a luxury and dignity a difficult art.” 5
In the aforesaid judgment Hon’ble Justice Krishna Iyer
has held as under:“14. Although these two codes are of ancient vintage. The new social justice orientation imparted to them by the Constitution of India makes it a remedial weapon of versatile use. Social justice is due to the people and, therefore, the people must be able to trigger off the jurisdiction vested for their benefits in any public functionary like a Magistrate under Section 133 Cr.P.C. In the exercise of such power, the judiciary must be informed by the
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 3
H
ig
h
C
ou rt
of H
.P .
broader principle of access to justice necessitated by the conditions of developing countries and obligated by Article 38 of the Constitution. This brings Indian Public Law, in its processual branch, in the line with the statement of Prof. Kojima:(2) “ the urgent need is to focus on the ordinary man-one might say the little man…” “Access to Justice” by Cappelletti and B. Garth Summarises the new change thus: (3) “The recognition of this urgent need reflects a fundamental change in the concept of “Procedural justice”… The new attitude to procedural justice reflects what Professor Adolf Homburger has called “ a redical change in the hierarchy of values served by civil procedure”; the paramount concern is increasingly with “ social justice,” i.e., with finding procedures which are conducive to the pursuit and protection of the rights of ordinary people. While the implications of this change are dramatic-for instance, insofar as the role of the adjudicator is concerned- it is worth emphasizing at the outset that the core values of the more traditional procedural justice must be retained. “Access to justice” must encompass both forms of procedural justice.”
6
15. Public nuisance, because of pollutants being discharged by big factories to the detriment of the poorer sections, is a challenge to the social justice component of the rule of law. Likewise, the grievous failure of local authorities to provide the basic amenity of public conveniences drives the miserable slum-dwellers to ease in the streets, on the sly for a time, and openly thereafter, because under Nature’s pressure, bashfulness becomes a luxury and dignity a difficult art. A responsible municipal council constituted for the precise purpose of preserving public health and providing better finances cannot run away from its principal duty by pleading financial inability. Decency and dignity are non-negotiable facets of human rights and are a first charge on local self-governing bodies. Similarly, providing drainage systems- not pompous and attractive, but in working condition and sufficient to meet the needs of the people-cannot be evaded if the municipality is to justify its existence. A bare study of the statutory provisions makes this position clear.”
The Hon’ble Apex Court in Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs.
Union of India & others by placing reliance upon the judgment Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrative, Union Territory of Delhi, (1981) 1SCC 608 has held as under:-
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 4
ou rt
of H
.P .
“ This right to live with human dignity enshrined in Article 21 derives its life breath from the Directive Principles of State Policy and particularly clauses (e) and (f) of Article 39 and Articles 41 and 42 and at the least, therefore, it must include protection of the health and strength of the workers, men and women, and of the tender age of children against abuse, opportunities and facilities for children to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity, educational facilities, just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief. These are the minimum requirements which must exist in order to enable a person to live with human dignity and no State neither the Central Government nor any State Government has the right to take any action which will deprive a person of the enjoyment of these basic essentials”.
In Virendra Gaur and Ors. V. State of Haryana and
7
Ors., (1995) 2 SCC,577 at 580, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as
H
ig
h
C
under:-
“5.Environment is poly-centric and multi-facet problem affecting the human existence. Environmental pollution causes bodily disabilities, leading to non-functioning of the vital organs of the body. Noise and pollution are two of the greatest offenders, the latter affects air, water, natural growth and health of the people. Environmental pollution affects, thereby, the health of general public. The Stockhoim Declaration of United Nations on Human Environment, 1972, reads its Principle No. 1, inter alia, thus: “Man has the fundamental right to freedom, equality and adequate conditions of life. In an environment of equality that permits a life of dignity and well-being and he bears a solemn responsibility to protect and improve the environment for present and future generations.” 6. The Declaration, therefore, affirms both aspects of environment, the natural and the man-made and the protection is essential to his well-being and to the enjoyment of basic human rights, i.e. the right to life itself. The right to have living atmosphere congenial to human existence is a right to life. The Declaration, therefore, says that "in the developing countries, most of the environmental problems are caused by under developments." The Declaration suggests recourse to safe actions with prudent care for ecological balance. "It is necessary to avoid massive and irreversible harm to the earthly environment and strive for achieving a better life for the present generation and posterity in an
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 5
.P .
environment more in keeping with their needs and hopes. The affirmative declaration in Principle No. 1 (supra) enjoins the Municipal States to solve environmental problems in the broadest human context and not as mere problems to conserve the nature for its own sake.
H
ig
h
C
ou rt
of H
7. Article 48-A in Part IV (Directive Principles) brought by the Constitution 42nd Amendment Act, 1976, enjoins that "the State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country." Article 47 further imposes the duty on the State to improve public health as its primary duty. Article 51-A(g) imposes "a fundamental duty" on every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural "environment" including forests lakes, rivers and wild life and to have compassion for living creatures." The word 'environment' is of broad spectrum which brings within its ambit "hygienic atmosphere and ecological balance." It is, therefore, not only the duty of the State but also the duty of every citizen to maintain hygienic environment The State, in particular has duty in that behalf and to shed its extravagant unbridled sovereign power and to forge in its policy to maintain ecological balance and hygienic environment. Article 21 protects right to life as a fundamental right. Enjoyment of life and its attainment including their right to life with human dignity encompasses within its ambit, the protection and preservation of environment, ecological balance free from pollution of air and water, sanitation without which life cannot be enjoyed. Any contra acts or actions would cause environmental pollution. Environmental ecological, air, water, pollution, etc. should be regarded as amounting to violation of Article 21. Therefore, hygienic environment is an integral facet of right to healthy life and it would be impossible to live with human dignity without a humane and healthy environment. Environmental protection, therefore, has now become a matter of grave concern for human existence, Promoting environmental protection implies maintenance of the environment as a whole comprising the man-made and the natural environment Therefore, there is a constitutional imperative on the State Government and the municipalities, not only to ensure and safe-guard proper environment but also an imperative duty to take adequate measures to promote, protect and improve both the man-made and the natural environment”.
8
In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India &
Ors. JT 1996(7) S.C.375 explained the “Precautionary Principle” and “Polluters Pays principle” as under:-
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 6 “ Some of the salient principles of “Sustainable Development”,
documents,
are
inter-Generational
.P .
as culled out from Brundtland Report and other international Equity,
Use
and
Conservation of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection,
of H
the Precautionary Principle, Polluter Pays principle, Obligation
to assist and cooperate, Eradication of Poverty and Financial Assistance to the developing countries. We are, however, of the view that “the Precautionary Principle” and “ the Polluter Pays” principle are essential features of “Sustainable Development”. The “Precautionary Principle”-in the contest of the municipal
(i)
ou rt
law-means:-
Environment measures:- by the State Government and the statutory authorities-must anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of environmental degradation. Where there are threats of serious and irreversible
C
(ii)
damage, lack of scientific certainty should not be used as
H
ig
h
a
9
(iii)
reason
for
postponing
measures
to
prevent
environmental degradation. The
“Onus
of
proof”
is
on
the
actor
or
the
developer/industrialist to show that this action is environmentally benign.”
In M.C.Mehta v. Kamal Nath and Ors., (1997)1 SCC
388 at 407, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held:-
“25. The Public Trust Doctrine primarily rests on the principle that certain resources like air sea, waters and the forests have such a great importance to the people as a whole that it would be wholly unjustified to make them a subject of private ownership. The said resources being a gift of nature, they should be made freely available to everyone irrespective of the status in life. The doctrine enjoins upon the Government to protect the resources for the enjoyment of the general public rather than to permit their use for private ownership or commercial purposes. According to Professor Sax the Public Trust Doctrine imposes the following restrictions on governmental authority:"Three types of restrictions on governmental authority are often thought to be imposed by
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 7
of H
.P .
the public trust: first, the property subject to the trust must not only be used for a public purpose, but it must be held available for use by the general public; second, the property may not be sold, even for a fair cash equivalent; and third property must be maintained in particular types of uses".
10
The Hon’ble Apex Court in Paschim Banga Khet
Mazdoor Samity and others versus State of W.B.&
another
ou rt
(1996)4 Supreme Court Cases 37, has held as under:-
H
ig
h
C
“The Constitution envisages the establishment of a welfare state at the federal level as well as at the state level. In a welfare state the primary duty of the Government is to secure the welfare of the people. Providing adequate medical facilities for the people is an essential part of the obligations undertaken by the Government in a welfare state. The Government discharges this obligation by running hospitals and health centres which provide medical care to the person seeking to avail of those facilities. Article 21 imposes an obligation on the State to safeguard the right to life of every person. Preservation of human life is thus of paramount importance. The Government hospitals run by the State and the medical officers employed therein are duty bound to extend medical assistance for preserving human life. Failure on the part of a Government hospital to provide timely medical treatment to a person in need of such treatment results in violation of his right to life guaranteed under Article 21. In the present case there was breach of the said right of Hakim Seikh guaranteed under Article 21 when he was denied treatment at the various Government hospitals which were approached even though his condition was very serious at that time and he was in need of immediate medical attention. Since the said denial of the right of Hakim Seikh guaranteed under Article 21 was by officers of the State in hospitals run by the State the State cannot avoid its responsibility for such denial of the constitutional right of Hakim Seikh. In respect of deprivation of the constitutional rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution the position is well settled that adequate compensation can be awarded by the court for such violation by way of redress in proceedings under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution. [See : Rudal Sah v. State of Bihar, 1983 (3) SCR 508 Nilabati Behara v. State of Orissa. 1993 (2) SCC 746: Consumer Education and Research Centre v. Union of India, 1995 (3) SCC 42]. Hakim Seikh should, therefore, be suitably compensated for the breach of his right guaranteed under Article 21 of
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 8
11
of H
.P .
the Constitution. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we fix the amount of such compensation at Rs. 25,000/-. A sum of Rs. 15,000/- was directed to be paid to Hakim Seikh as interim compensation under the orders of this Court dated April 22, 1994. The balance amount should be paid by respondent No. 1 to Hakim Seikh within one month.”
In Devika Biswas versus Union of India and others
(2016) 10 Supreme Court Cases 726, the Hon’ble Apex Court has
ou rt
held as under:-
“Right to life
C
106. The manner in which sterilization procedures have reportedly been carried out endanger two important components of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution – the right to health and there productive rights of a person.
H
ig
h
(i) Right to health
107. It is well established that the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution includes the right to lead a dignified and meaningful life and the right to health is an integral facet of this right. In C.E.S.C. Limited v. Subhash Chandra Bose(1992)1SCC 441 dealing with the right to health of workers, it was noted that the right to health must be considered an aspect of social justice informed by not only Article 21 of the Constitution, but also the Directive Principles of State Policy and international covenants to which India is a party. Similarly, the bare minimum obligations of the State to ensure the preservation of the right to life and health were enunciated in Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity v. State of W.B.(1996) 4SCC 37. 108. In Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India & Others (1984) 3 SCC 161, this Court underlined the obligation of the State to ensure that the fundamental rights of weaker sections of society are not exploited owing to their position in society. 109. That the right to health is an integral part of the right to life does not need any repetition”.
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 9 12
in Milun
.P .
A Division Bench of Bombay High Court
Saryajani Through Editor vs. Pune Municipal Commissioner AIR 2016(NOC) 261 Bom. 1 passed an order that said all corporations constitute
a
committee.
The
State
shall
of H
shall
formulate
a
comprehensive scheme that will look into the identification of the spot for construction of toilets. The order read, “The emphasis should not be on providing number of toilets on the basis of
ou rt
proportion of women population, rather on providing proper facilities at the right places where they are needed the most.” 13
In view of ever expanding definition of right to life, citizen
of the country are certainly entitled to civic amenities and medical
C
aid, during the course of his/her travel, which he/she undertakes, by
h
whatsoever mode of transport, on the State/ National Highways. It clearly emerge from the some of the judgments, as referred
ig
hereinabove,
that right to Sanitation has been now virtually
H
accepted as constitutional right as fundamental rights like right to water, right to health, right to healthy environment, right to education
and right to dignity are directly related to right of
sanitation. Bare necessities of life includes proper sanitation facilities as the practice of open defecation or a life with polluted drinking water source and environment cannot be considered as a life of dignity as understood in the context of Right to life under the constitution. The Stockhoim Declaration of United Nations on Human Environment, 1972, reads its Principle No.1, inter alia, thus”:“Man has the fundamental right to freedom, quality and adequate conditions of life. In an environment of equality
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 10 that permits a life of dignity and well-being and he bears
.P .
a solemn responsibility to protect and improve the environment for present and future generations.”
The affirmative declaration in Principle No.1 enjoins the
of H
Municipal States to solve environment problems in the
broadest human context and not as mere problems to conserve the nature for its own sake.
Human Rights Council resolution A/HRC/ 15/L.14:provides the legal basis for the rights to water and sanitation but also recognizes that it is inextricably
ou rt
related to the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, as well as the right to life and human dignity.’
UN General Assembly (GA) passed Resolution 64/292
which affirmed that sanitation was a human right
C
“inextricably linked to the highest standard of physical and mental health, as well as the right to life and human
h
dignity.”
With large number of pronouncements having been made
ig
14
by various constitutional courts of this country, more particularly,
H
Hon’ble Apex Court of this Country, Article 21 of the Constitution of India protects right to life as a fundamental right, wherein its meaning/scope has been considerably expended by the judicial pronouncement, as a result of which, enjoyment of life and its attainment including the right to life with human dignity has been imparted as a basic fundamental right of citizen of the country. The protection and preservation of environment, ecological balance free from pollution of air and water, sanitation without which life cannot be enjoyed have been held to be fundamental right of the citizens of the country. Any acts which could cause environment pollution has been regarded as amounting to violation of Article 21 of the
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 11
.P .
Constitution of India and as such, hygienic environment has been held integral facet of right to healthy life and it would be impossible to live with human dignity without a humane and healthy
of H
environment. There is a constitutional imperative on the State Government and the municipalities, not only to ensure and safeguard environment but to take adequate measures to promote, protect
and
improve
both
the
manmade
and
the
natural
ou rt
environment. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Common cause, A Registered Society v. Union of India & Ors has observed in para 175 as under:-
Similarly, Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Maharashtra v.
h
15
C
“175. Right to Life,” set out in Article 21, means something more than mere survival or animal existence.
ig
Chandrabhan Tale (1983) 3 SCC 387; has observed that the right also includes the right to live with human dignity and all that goes
H
alongwith it, namely, the bare necessities of life.” 16
Apart from above, Article 47 cast duty upon the State to
improve public health as its primary duty under Article 47 of the Constitution of India. Similarly, Article 48-A in Part IV (Directive Principles) brought by the Constitution 42nd amendment Act, 1976, cast duty upon the State that “the State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country.” Similarly, Article 51-A(g) imposes “a fundamental duty” on every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural “environment” including
forests lakes, rivers and wild life and to
have compassion for living creatures.” The word “environment” is of
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 12
.P .
broad spectrum which bring within its ambit “hygienic atmosphere and ecological balance”, and as such it is not only the duty of the State but also the duty of the every citizen to maintain hygienic
of H
environment. The State, in particular has duty in that regard to maintain ecological balance and hygienic environment. Our legal system based on English Common Law includes the public trust doctrine as part of its jurisprudence which provides that the State is
ou rt
the trustee of all the natural resources, which are by nature meant for public use and enjoyment. The State as a trustee is under legal duty to protect the natural resources. 17
In the aforesaid background, this Court is of the definite
C
view that State is under obligation to provide basic amenities to the
h
citizens of the country while ensuring that their right of sanitation is not defeated. Definitely, citizens travelling on the State/National
ig
Highways, need to be protected from open defecation, untreated
H
disposal of waste into streams and contamination of water supplies, which could be caused by the heavy influx of tourists and lack of proper amenities in the State. Lack of sanitation impacts our environment and it consigns people to the undignified and unsafe practice
of
open
defecation/urination
and
inefficient
waste
management which in turn causes serious health and hygiene issues. 18
As per own estimation, respondents-State informed that
approximately 5000 buses daily ply in the State/ National Highways in the State of Himachal Pradesh and shockingly, there are no public conveniences available on these highways, as a result of which, public travelling day in and day out in such roads are compelled to
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 13
.P .
urinate/ defecate in open places causing damage to the ecology as well as pollution in an around such areas. This Court cannot loose sight of the fact that at present various State as well as National
of H
Highways are under construction and after completion of such projects there should be an exponential rise in the number of people entering in the State of Himachal Pradesh, which is known for its natural beauty.
As per the information imparted by the learned Amicus
ou rt
19
curiae, approximately 10 million toilets were constructed in the year 2006-2007 to 2010-11 across the country under the Total Sanitation Campaign, but unfortunately toilets remain largely defunct and are
C
reportedly being used as storerooms.
In the year, 2016 Himachal
h
Pradesh was declared “Open Defecation Free’”(ODF) i.e. the country’s second State to get the status under “Swachh Bharat Mission” to
ig
have toilet for every individual household. Learned Amicus Curiae
H
also informed that after having acquired aforesaid status, State of Himachal Pradesh has made itself entitled to receive World Bank funding amounting to Rs. 9,000/- crore projects to sustain sanitation campaign. This Court also cannot loose sight of the fact that in the year, 2016 itself more than 15,000/- cases of Hepatitis-E were reported from the three Districts of Shimla, Solan and Sirmaur after the jaundice outbreak. National Family Health Survey-4 of 2015-16 suggest that infant mortality rate in State of Himachal Pradesh is 35%, whereas prevalence of Diarrhoea is 10% in urban and 5% in rural areas. This Court, without going further into the details, has no hesitation to conclude that non availability of public conveniences on the State as well as National Highways in the State of H.P. shall
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 14
.P .
further add to pollution in the State of Himachal Pradesh. Apart from above, Himachal Pradesh being most favourite fascinating tourism destination is bond to receive lots of tourist from various States of
of H
Country as well as other parts of world. 20
During the proceedings of the case, we were informed by
learned Advocate General on the basis of information having been furnished by the tourism department that approximately 1 crore 84
ou rt
lakh tourists visited State of Himachal Pradesh in a year. Aforesaid number may be much higher since aforesaid information is not based upon the exact data collected at relevant places. Learned Advocate General while submitting aforesaid data, fairly conceded that number
C
may be high as information is only based upon the information
h
supplied by the tourism department. Similarly, we were informed that approximately 86 lakh tourist vehicles entered in the State of
ig
Himachal
Pradesh
w.e.f.
01.04.2016
to
31.03.2017,
whereas
H
available road surface in the State of Himachal Pradesh is approximately 33000 Km. After having came to know mind boggling figure, which may further increase, this Court is of the view that situation is alarming and in case adequate steps are not taken by the respondents-State immediately, great damage would be caused to the ecology of the State and apart from above, there may be out of break of epidemic which may cause serious threat to the resident/citizens of the State. This Court, after having gone through the compliance affidavit filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 & 4 filed in compliance to the directions dated 3.5.2017 and 11.05.2017 hopes and trust that serious efforts would be made by the authorities being a welfare
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 15
highways in the State of Himachal Pradesh. 21
.P .
State to provide basic amenities i.e. toilets rent rooms etc. on the
We are happy to note that respondents-State considering
of H
the issue at hand to be of public importance convened meeting under the Chairmanship of Additional Chief Secretary (PW) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh on 11.05.2017, wherein it took policy decision to fully support this public cause being in public
ou rt
interest. Similarly, perusal of status report having been filed by the respondents-State, suggest that Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh convened meeting of all concerned department and also conducted video conference on 21st March, 2017 with the
C
concerned departments to ensure that necessary steps are taken in
h
this regard. While appreciating the efforts having been put by the respondents-State after issuance of directions passed by this Court,
ig
we may add that it is still beginning and lot of work in this direction
H
is required to be done by the State of Himachal Pradesh to make this State
free
from
pollution. In
the
status
report,
as referred
hereinabove, respondents have proposed certain locations, wherein public conveniences can be provided, but this Court is of the view that to make this campaign more successful, respondents need to start awareness programme so that public at large is persuaded to join hands with the respondents, which is ultimately in the interest of every citizen/residence of the State. 22
It also emerge from the status report/ compliance
affidavit having been filed by the respondents that a meeting of all the petrol pump owners was also convened at certain places, where they were directed to provide basic facilities like toilets and drinking
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 16
.P .
water to the public. But facilities, if any, at petrol pump can only used by commuters, who happened to visit petrol pump for fueling but as far as other commuters, who may travel in buses, be it State
of H
or public, needful is required to be done at war footing by the respondents by providing public convenience on the State as well as National Highways that too at after certain distances. 23
Now, the question remains at how aforesaid public cause,
ou rt
whereby right to sanitation as stands granted to the citizens of the State which realized the critical factors involved in the realization of this rights
affordability,
are: “ Availability, accessibility, quality/ safety, acceptability
and
cross-cutting
criteria
as
“
C
participation, accountability, impact, sustainability, awareness,
h
capacity building, monitoring and litigation, wherein process of improving sanitation can be a root to improving health, restoring
ig
dignity
and
enhancing
economic
prospects.
Needless
to
say,
H
Sanitation must be safe, physically assessable, affordable and culturally acceptable and in this regard this Court inteds to make certain suggestions, which may be helpful for the authorities while preparing blue print for realization of aforesaid rights of sanitation, especially on highways :i).
Public toilets can be constructed at places, which could be easily located by the public at large and in this regard sign boards of “ Public Toilets”
or
“
Private
Toilets”
should
be
displayed; ii)
Free services should be provided in cases of public toilets and charges could be prescribed for private toilets and in all toilets, staff
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 17 should be provided to take care and maintain
iii)
.P .
the same;
The facilities should be easily accessible by
of H
the ladies walking or driving on the roads, and they are not be dangerous or inconvenient place, so as to encourage its use by the ladies;
iv).
The facilities should have proper disposal
ou rt
system for disposal of sanitary napkins; v).
It is necessary to ensure the safety and security of women, proper action should be taken against the male members/attendants, if they are found sitting outside the ladies
C
toilets in a drunken state.
vi).
Authorities may also consider it to make it
h
necessary/mandatory for all the Dhabas/ Restaurants on the highways
to make
ig
available public toilets for the use of general public,
rather
authorities
while
granting
H
permission to such Dhabas/ Restaurants shall
consider
incorporating
specific
conditions with regard to provision of toilets and rest rooms and to maintain hygiene the
same,
failing
which
of
their
registration/permit to carry out the business could be cancelled.
vii)
Apart from above, there is emergent need to provide medical aid on the highways at appropriate relief/help
places, is
so
that
provided
commuters/travelers
in
the
immediate to event
the of
emergency. Needless to say, such medical aid centres aid should be well equipped so that
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 18 is provided on the
requirement basis.
Authorities Conductor
may
also
involve
Driver/
of H
viii).
.P .
best possible first aid
driving their vehicles on these
highways in this campaign by specifically directing them to stop their vehicles at a place where commuters/ travelers can avail facility
ou rt
of toilet apart from taking refreshment;
xi)
Authorities may also involve public sector undertaking or private operators in the State of H.P.in this campaign, who come forward to
C
render their help in the greater public interest;
ig
h
x)
H
24
To
engage
with
Active
Civil
Society
organizations, active individuals as they are key elements that may improve the success rate of campaigns at grassroots level.
This Court cannot loose sight of the fact that due to lack
of good toilet facilities, especially for women in public places, who are unable to void urine in time when they get out of the house, as a result of which, there are increased chances of women getting urinary tract infection due to undue prolonged storage of urine in the bladder and as such needful is required to be done without further delay. This Court is cautious of the fact that aforesaid public cause cannot be materialized without the help of public at large and as such massive campaign is required to be founded/made by way of local newspaper, T.V. Channel, so that there is behavioural change in the mind set of people and in this regard educational messages about
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
WWW.LIVELAW.IN 19
.P .
health and hygiene can be provided so that common man is benefited. 25
This Court has every reason to hope and trust that all
of H
necessary steps would be taken up by the State being welfare State for success of above said public cause. 26
Consequently, in view of above, we deem it fit to implead
Deputy Commissioners of all the Districts as party respondents who
ou rt
in turn shall convene meeting with the authorities in their Districts, who are responsible for providing such basic facilities on the State as well as National Highways. We further direct the Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, to issue necessary directions
C
to the authorities concerned in this regard, so that programme
h
suggested in the meeting held on 21st March, 2017 under the Chairmanship of Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal
H
ig
Pradesh is implemented in its letter and spirit.
Let, this matter be listed on 15.6.2017, on which date,
the Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, shall file affidavit specifically indicating therein progress, if any, having been made by the respondents-State towards aforesaid public cause.
(Sanjay Karol), Acting Chief Justice
19th May, 2017 (shankar)
(Sandeep Sharma), Judge
::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 10:42:29 :::HCHP
