The Supreme Court on Friday batted for a regulatory body to effectuate the fundamental right to walk on demarcated footpaths.

A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar, which ruled that the right to walk on a demarcated footpath is a fundamental right and has priority over movement by motorised vehicles, said the citizen is entitled to enforce restitutionary remedy in case of violation of his right to walk.

“To enhance and effectuate the fundamental right to walk on demarcated footpaths, it is necessary to establish a regulatory body. Working with perpetual seal and succession, such a regulator will develop and retain institutional memory so that it can act on the basis of the experience, data and information it has gathered and processed,” the bench emphasised.

It said institutional expertise was critical, and such a regulator will employ human resources with domain expertise and talent.

“The regulator will maintain institutional integrity by taking independent and objective decisions without governmental or industrial control. These values shall flow naturally if there is institutional transparency and accountability.

“It is in this perspective that we need to effectuate the fundamental right to walk,” the top court said.

The declaration by the top court came in a motor accident compensation case where a father lost his five-year-old son to a road accident while taking him to school.

The bench said it is important to recognise that if the fundamental right to walk on a demarcated footpath is violated, a citizen is entitled to enforce a restitutionary remedy.

“This remedy is distinct from that of the claim that a person may make under the Motor Vehicles Act. The restitutionary remedy under the Constitution or under Sections 38-40 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 for the enforcement of public duties can be enforced against the Urban Development Authorities, Municipal Corporations, Municipalities or the Panchayats,” the top court said.

It added that Part III of the Constitution, which guarantees fundamental rights, has a unique relationship with Parliament and state legislatures.

“While it injuncts and limits the legislature from making “laws that are inconsistent with or in derogation of fundamental rights”, it also envisages a positive role for the legislature to effectuate the exercise and enjoyment of the fundamental rights,” it said, adding that Parliament and state legislatures have enacted laws effectuating each of the fundamental rights.

Referring to the Right to Information Act, Right to Education Act and National Food Security Act of 2013, the bench said modern legislatures have devised and adopted a statutory regime that not only reiterates the concerned fundamental right but also recognises the duty bearers and provisions legal remedies.

“Apart from the declaration, recognition and provision of the right, duty and remedy, modern statutes have been entrenching a new character of institutional governance by establishing regulatory bodies. These bodies institutionalise memory through perpetual seal and succession, institutionalise expertise by incorporating specialisation, institutionalise diversity through composition and also institutionalise integrity through accountability,” it said.

The bench said insofar as the right to walk on demarcated footpaths is concerned, though it is integral to Articles 21 and 19(1)(d) of the Constitution, there is no express legislation for execution of this right and a statutory framework was required.

“It is compelling to lay down a statutory framework not only for declaring the right but also for recognising the duty bearers. The Act must protect, enhance and provide quick remedies for violations, and also establish a full-time regulator to plan, enforce and implement this precious right,” it said, while directing the registry to send a copy of the judgment to the Centre through ministries of housing and urban affairs, rural development, and road transport and highways to reflect on the compelling necessity for initiating the necessary legal framework.

“A copy may also be sent to the Law Commission for examining the statutory framework for protecting the right, identifying the duty bearers and provisioning remedies. Constitutional courts also have a duty to declare with clarity the existence of this fundamental right and ensure that the existing civil and the constitutional remedies are accessible and effective,” the top court underscored.