‘Daydreaming’ about cycle tracks in all cities when basic needs unmet: SC

The Supreme Court has questioned the feasibility of mandating cycle tracks in all Indian cities, saying such demands were akin to “daydreaming” when millions lack access to basic necessities such as affordable housing, healthcare, and education.

“Go to any slum, find out the conditions in which people are staying. States do not have money to take care of slum dwellers, States cannot give affordable housing...When people don’t have basic facilities of housing and medicines, we are daydreaming by saying that every city should have cycle tracks,” said a bench of justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan on Monday.

It refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a directive for dedicated cycle tracks across all major cities. The bench emphasised that such reliefs were neither practical nor enforceable.

“Such reliefs can never be granted. How is it possible? You are treating India like a European country where every city should have a cycle track…We can’t compare India with the Netherlands,” the bench told advocate Chaitanya Mahajan, who appeared for petitioner Davinder Singh Nagi.

Mahajan said that municipal and town-planning laws mandate dedicated cycling tracks and that nearly 50% of road accident victims are pedestrians and cyclists. He argued that “non-motorised transport ways,” including pedestrians and cyclists, would benefit about 60% of road users, particularly the urban poor.

The court remained unconvinced. It pointed out that previous court rulings recognised footpaths as a fundamental right, but mandating cycle tracks across the country was not viable.

“These are the matters that high courts should deal with, based on their peculiar conditions. Some states are in hilly terrain. How can we have cycling tracks there? It is too tall a claim to be made in a PIL,” it said.

Citing the example of Pune, Mahajan argued that despite multiple plans for cycle tracks, nothing had materialised. The bench said:” If you have cycle tracks on major roads in Pune, it will lead to huge traffic congestion. And if you want to construct new cycle tracks, lakhs of houses will have to be demolished.”

The court stressed that infrastructure priorities in India must focus on more urgent issues. “Go to a city like Mumbai. The first issue is housing. Housing and medical facilities...are the things that should get priority. Today, there is a reported judgment of the Bombay high court saying that 26% of the police force stays in slums because they have no houses.”

“Our priorities are going wrong. A person who is earning a salary of 20,000 -- if he is transferred to Mumbai or Pune, he will have to stay in slums. That is the issue we are facing. And we are talking about haves...those who can afford to have cycle tracks in every city. Ultimately, we have to address the right priorities. People don’t get clean water, municipal schools are closing down, and we are talking about cycle tracks!”

In its final order, the bench acknowledged the importance of the issue but declined to intervene at a national level. “As far as the construction of cycle tracks is concerned, all major cities in India, without exception, have issues of providing affordable houses, basic facilities like medical treatment, and education at a reasonable cost. Apart from that, sanitation and solid waste management are challenges faced by all cities in India,” the order said.

The bench reiterated the matter would be best handled by respective high courts, as conditions vary across states. The petition was disposed of with the liberty to approach high courts, while directing states to continue their existing efforts. The court said it was already dealing with road safety issues in another case.