0
You visited us 0 times! Enjoying our articles? Unlock Full Access!
Question

Re-read excerpts from the judgment on the Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation case.

Now write in your own words what the judges meant when they said that the Right to Livelihood was part of the Right to Life.

Solution
Verified by Toppr

In Olga Tellis vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation case, the judges said that the Right to Livelihood was part of the Right to Life. They stated that life does not merely imply an animal existence; it cannot be lived without a means of living, that is, "the means of livelihood". The judges conferred that eviction from a pavement or slum is deprivation of means of livelihood for the poor who cannot afford to live anywhere else. They take up small jobs in surrounding areas and to lose their pavement or slum would lead to loss of a job resulting in loss of a means of livelihood. Consequently, leading to "deprivation of life". This is how the judges connected Right to Livelihood to the Right to Life.

Was this answer helpful?
47
Similar Questions
Q1
Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation case established the ____ with ____.
View Solution
Q2
Q. In which of the following cases was Right to Livelihood made an inherent part of Right to Life by the Supreme Court ?
View Solution
Q3
Describe the chawls of Bombay in your own words. From where was this system adopted?
View Solution
Q4
You wish to write a letter to the Municipal Corporation to request that they install a stoplight at a busy intersection in your city.
Which of the following could suitably be used in this letter?
View Solution
Q5
Right to livelihood is a part of the Right to Life.
View Solution