Cycle Tracks Instead Of Housing, Health Facilities For Poor, SC Wonders On Direction Sought

A bench comprising justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing a plea for creating separate cycle tracks across the country.

New Delhi:The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked a counsel, whether funds from the state exchequer should be utilised for creating housing, health and educational facilities for the poor or for creating cycle tracks across the country.

The matter came up before a bench comprising justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan. The bench asked the counsel, representing a petitioner, whether money from the state exchequer be used on creating residential and educational facilities for the poor or for creating separate cycle tracks.

The bench said that in all major cities, there is an acute problem of housing facilities for the poor and the people are living in slums.

The counsel contended before the bench that several states had cycle tracks and pointed out that a cycle track was even there outside one of the gates of the apex court but it is a very short length track, which wasn't available on taking a turn.
The bench stressed that there is lack of health facilities and educational facilities for the poor. “Should all these elementary facilities be provided or these cycle tracks?”, the bench asked while hearing a plea for creating separate cycle tracks across the country.

The counsel cited Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation scheme, focusing on the development of basic infrastructure in selected cities and towns. The bench told the counsel, “You want separate cycle tracks to be created across India. Very ambitious”.

The bench asked the counsel, how can the court issue a direction for having separate cycle tracks and told the counsel, “This is day-dreaming of the petitioner”.

The counsel emphasised that during winters air pollution is a serious problem for Delhi-NCR and if separate cycle tracks were available then it would help mitigate the problem. After hearing the arguments, the bench scheduled the matter for further hearing on February 10.

Read more