The Right to Livelihood as part of the Right to Life.
Explanation
The case of Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985) is a landmark judgment by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court concerning the interpretation of Article 21 (Protection of Life and Personal Liberty).
Analysis:
- The petitioners, who were pavement and slum dwellers, argued that evicting them from their makeshift homes would deprive them of their livelihood, which is essential for life.
- The Supreme Court accepted this argument and held that the Right to Life conferred by Article 21 includes the Right to Livelihood.
- The Court reasoned that no person can live without the means of living, that is, the means of livelihood. If the right to livelihood is not treated as a part of the constitutional right to life, the easiest way of depriving a person of their right to life would be to deprive them of their means of livelihood.
- Consequently, any eviction that leads to deprivation of livelihood must follow a procedure established by law that is just, fair, and reasonable.
Key Takeaway:
The Olga Tellis judgment expanded the scope of Article 21 by establishing that the Right to Livelihood is an integral part of the Right to Life, ensuring procedural safeguards against arbitrary eviction.