<p class="bodytext">The ongoing eviction of street vendors in Bengaluru exposes a troubling collapse of governance, legality, and basic human sensitivity. What is being presented as an exercise in restoring urban order following the transition from the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) is, in reality, a violation of statutory protections and fundamental rights. An administrative move has morphed into a humanitarian crisis, with the city’s most vulnerable workers paying the price for bureaucratic inertia. At the heart of the crisis is a legal vacuum deliberately allowed to persist. The transition has stalled the issuance of identity cards, while older BBMP-issued documents are being arbitrarily declared invalid. This has effectively criminalised survival. Vendors across neighbourhoods say their business hours are now consumed by fear of police harassment and eviction.</p>.BBMP–GBA transition leaves Bengaluru's street vendors in limbo.<p class="bodytext">There is no denying that unregulated vending inconveniences pedestrians and adds to traffic congestion. However, these conflicts arise primarily from the State’s abdication of its duty to demarcate and notify clear vending zones. Punishing vendors for the GBA’s incompetence is neither fair nor lawful. The injustice is magnified by a disputed official survey that recognises only 27,000 vendors, while the unions place the number at over one lakh. If the civic body plans zones based on the lower figure, over 70,000 people will be rendered unauthorised, making them easy targets for permanent displacement. Women vendors face a particularly harsh impact, as this is often their sole source of income. A single eviction can wipe out days of earnings. Yet, disturbingly, both the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission and the State Women’s Commission have remained complicitly silent. Their failure to take suo motu cognisance of a human rights violation has only emboldened administrative apathy.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The law leaves no room for ambiguity. The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, prohibits eviction until a comprehensive survey is completed and vending certificates are issued. The Supreme Court has affirmed that street vending is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g), recognising vendors as "assets of the city" rather than encroachers. Eviction without due process or proper rehabilitation is therefore unconstitutional. Order on the roads must be reclaimed, but not on the foundation of illegality and human suffering. The GBA must immediately halt evictions, recognise existing identity cards until new ones are issued, complete a genuine survey, and notify lawful vending zones. A city that prides itself on progress cannot abandon justice and compassion for the vulnerable population that sustains its informal economy.</p>
<p class="bodytext">The ongoing eviction of street vendors in Bengaluru exposes a troubling collapse of governance, legality, and basic human sensitivity. What is being presented as an exercise in restoring urban order following the transition from the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) is, in reality, a violation of statutory protections and fundamental rights. An administrative move has morphed into a humanitarian crisis, with the city’s most vulnerable workers paying the price for bureaucratic inertia. At the heart of the crisis is a legal vacuum deliberately allowed to persist. The transition has stalled the issuance of identity cards, while older BBMP-issued documents are being arbitrarily declared invalid. This has effectively criminalised survival. Vendors across neighbourhoods say their business hours are now consumed by fear of police harassment and eviction.</p>.BBMP–GBA transition leaves Bengaluru's street vendors in limbo.<p class="bodytext">There is no denying that unregulated vending inconveniences pedestrians and adds to traffic congestion. However, these conflicts arise primarily from the State’s abdication of its duty to demarcate and notify clear vending zones. Punishing vendors for the GBA’s incompetence is neither fair nor lawful. The injustice is magnified by a disputed official survey that recognises only 27,000 vendors, while the unions place the number at over one lakh. If the civic body plans zones based on the lower figure, over 70,000 people will be rendered unauthorised, making them easy targets for permanent displacement. Women vendors face a particularly harsh impact, as this is often their sole source of income. A single eviction can wipe out days of earnings. Yet, disturbingly, both the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission and the State Women’s Commission have remained complicitly silent. Their failure to take suo motu cognisance of a human rights violation has only emboldened administrative apathy.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The law leaves no room for ambiguity. The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, prohibits eviction until a comprehensive survey is completed and vending certificates are issued. The Supreme Court has affirmed that street vending is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g), recognising vendors as "assets of the city" rather than encroachers. Eviction without due process or proper rehabilitation is therefore unconstitutional. Order on the roads must be reclaimed, but not on the foundation of illegality and human suffering. The GBA must immediately halt evictions, recognise existing identity cards until new ones are issued, complete a genuine survey, and notify lawful vending zones. A city that prides itself on progress cannot abandon justice and compassion for the vulnerable population that sustains its informal economy.</p>
