Bombay HC seeks authorities' reply to PIL for adequate hygienic toilets for women along highways
The Bombay High Court on Monday issued notice seeking the response of central and state governments and National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) to a PIL seeking direction to construct and maintain accessible and hygienic sanitation facilities for women along national and state highways.
A bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep V Marne was hearing a PIL by lawyer Kanchan S Chindarkar raising concerns over lack of sanitation facilities for women on Highways in the state.
The PIL claimed that the same gravely violates the fundamental right to life with dignity and privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution.
It added that pregnant, menstruating and elderly women and girl students are disproportionately affected.
'Despite the Women's Policies of 2001 and 2014, and the Draft National Policy of 2016, along with the goals of Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, the State and Union instrumentalities have failed to implement these in practice — especially the clear mandate to provide toilets every 25 km as per Chapter 10 of the 2014 Policy,' the PIL argued.
The petitioner claimed that previous court verdicts have stated that sanitation is integral to the Right to Life and state authorities cannot evade their responsibility citing resource constraints.
The plea sought immediate steps for the construction, maintenance of accessible, safe and hygienic sanitation facilities for women at every 25 kilometres along national and state highways in Maharashtra.
It also sought a directive to authorities to provide details on the number of existing toilet facilities and their usability conditions and locations, and proposed an action plan including budget allocations for constructing new public toilets for women.
The PIL also sought periodic field surveys and audits within authorities to assess conditions of sanitation infrastructure along highways.
The bench also referred to a past HC order of December, 2015 in which directives were issued to provide hygienic sanitation facilities for women within the Municipal area.
It issued notice to respondents and posted the further hearing to July 7.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Preamble of Constitution finds new readers after translation to local languages of Karnataka
Those familiar with the languages of Karnataka on a surface level might immediately think of Kannada, Konkani or Tulu, to name some, but these are just the beginning of the list. Dozens of languages are spoken by communities from district to district. The Alternative Law Forum, a collective of lawyers working on the accessibility of law, has produced translations of the Preamble to the Constitution in several of these languages. These translations have so far been brought out in the languages Malame, Sanketi, Byari, Iruliga, Aruvu and Lambani. Iruliga is spoken by the Iruliga or Irula community, Lambani by the Banjara community, while Sanketi and Aruvu are Dravidian languages native to the state. Malame and Byari are spoken more in the region around Dakshina Kannada, with the latter being the language of the Byari/Beary Muslims. The ALF also plans to translate the Preamble into more languages as translators become available. Ashwini Bodh, an ALF researcher working on the project, said, 'We have translated the Preamble into these six languages so far.' She noted that the project has received a positive response from community members so far. She added, 'We conduct workshops about the Constitution across the districts to spread awareness. While travelling there, I saw people from these communities who were speaking these various languages and thought that nobody had done the translations into these languages.' Bodh noted that on the principle that something had to be done, whether it was a small or big language, she started the project with the help of translators. Bodh added, 'People do not know that much about the Preamble or the Constitution. At least if the Preamble is in their language, they feel that 'this is ours'. We have planned several steps. One is the translation and poster design. The second is audio and video recordings via social media.' One difficulty was the aspect of translation itself; subtleties of the language of the Constitution may not easily be communicated in different languages. Ashwini Bodh said, 'Many people don't have context for certain single values – such as liberty or fraternity. Many people may understand liberty as freedom – but it is not only freedom, it is a separate thing. Some words like that are a bit tricky and required proficiency, with three to four people working on translating and editing.'
Hans India
25 minutes ago
- Hans India
Kharge slams 11 years of Modi-led NDA govt
Kalaburagi: Slamming 11 years of the Narendra Modi-led NDA government at the Centre, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge on Wednesday accused the Prime Minister of committing 33 mistakes during this period. He claimed that he had never seen a PM who lies so much and 'traps' people and deceives the youth. 'It has been 11 years and 33 mistakes have been committed. You are aware and I have been saying it in parliament too -- I have never seen a Prime Minister who lies so much, who commits so many mistakes, who traps people, who deceives youth, who traps the poor and gets votes. I have been in power for 55 years, and in politics for 65 years. There has been no one like him,' Kharge said. Speaking to reporters here, he said the PM lies for everything and does not implement anything that he says, and when questioned he does not have any answers for it. 'Whether it is demonetisation or employment generation or MSP, there are many such things. He has never admitted that he has lied to people and has committed a mistake, and never apologised for it. He keeps on saying things one after the other and it has been 11 years now,' he added. Prime Minister Modi took oath for a third term on June 9, 2024. The Modi government marked its first anniversary in the third term and 11th overall on Monday. Kharge also said that he has written a letter to PM Modi stating that, in accordance with the Constitution, a Deputy Speaker should be appointed for the Lok Sabha, and that the government has to function in accordance with the Constitution. 'Modi says democracy, democracy. No Prime Minister after Independence has kept the Deputy Speaker post vacant, but during both his tenures (as PM), now the third period is going on, the post has been kept vacant,' he said. Noting that there is a provision in the Constitution about the election of Deputy Speaker, Kharge said when UPA government was there, a leader from the opposition was made the Deputy Speaker and this had been done earlier too. 'Modi's act is illegal, undemocratic, and he doesn't even want to give the post of Deputy Speaker to the Opposition. It shows he has no faith in democracy,' he added.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
The battle today is not for the abstract ideals of Constitution — it is for democracy itself
Written by Anmol Jain 'Samvidhan khatre mein hai' has been the rallying cry of Congress since the beginning of its campaign for the 2024 general elections. After the polls, the party doubled down on this narrative, directing its state units to conduct Samvidhan Bachao rallies across the country. Several such rallies were organised in April and May in many states, including Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh. On June 8, the Yatra began in Goa. Over the past year, Congress has left no occasion to assert that our Constitution is under threat. But a deeper, more pressing question must be asked, not just by the Opposition, but by every citizen: If the Constitution is in danger, what exactly needs to be rescued, safeguarded, and nourished? The complexity of the question demands that we ascribe an identity to the Constitution. And this identity is connected to another core idea of the Republic: Democracy. From the abuse of constitutional offices like that of the Governor — as the Supreme Court emphasised in the Tamil Nadu Governor case — to the trampling of rights, threats to the foundational essence of democracy are real. Notably, it is often rooted in constitutional structures and silences. For instance, the Constitution does not explicitly ask the Governor or the Speaker to shed all partisan loyalties in their functioning. However, our demand that they rise above party lines stems from the democratic values the Constitution is meant to embody. The Constitution, in this sense, becomes an accessible language through which we reassert and reinforce democratic values in public discourse. However, this language is gradually losing its resonance. When the essence of constitutional arrangements is repeatedly subverted for short-term political gain, non-constitutional justifications begin to suffice. And when courts do intervene, often the independent institutions are blamed, but not the style of governance. So, the political and intellectual struggle today cannot be framed merely as a defence of the Constitution. It must go deeper and become a struggle to resurface, reiterate, and reassert the 'identity' of the Constitution and the democratic values it is meant to uphold. And to do so, we must shift the pivot of the discourse from 'Constitution' to 'Democracy'. There are two long-term dangers to the overreliance on the Constitution as the central narrative. The first is political. If those raising the slogan today come to power, they would find it difficult to pursue the structural changes necessary for democratic repair. Any attempt to redesign constitutional structures and institutions, however justified, would risk the charge of hypocrisy. Having opposed constitutional change while in opposition, they would be accused of undermining it once in office. They might also face the slogan 'Samvidhan khatre mein hai.' The second is intellectual. An overemphasis on the Constitution risks stifling critical engagement with it. After all, constitutional provisions were used to enable the imposition of Emergency, legitimise central executive dominance, and allow repeated rights violations. In light of what the country has experienced over the past 75 years, a critical, reflective engagement with the Constitution is not only desirable, it is essential. But such a critique becomes difficult when the Constitution is treated as a flawless relic that must be defended at all cost. Any discourse rooted in democracy is politically sharper. It is far harder for incumbents to deflect an opposition narrative grounded in loktantra. The government is, no doubt, elected constitutionally and acts largely within formal constitutional bounds. But that is precisely the issue: Constitutional form is being used to mask democratic erosion. The Constitution remains intact, but democracy appears to be backsliding. This distinction is crucial. The battle today is not for the Constitution in the abstract. It is for democracy itself. The writer teaches law Jindal Global Law School. He was the 2023-24 Fox International Fellow at Yale University and Melbourne Law School
