Bengaluru’s Shivajinagar is exposing a difficult question at the centre of the city’s footpath clearance campaign: who gets to use public pedestrian space, and under what rules? While small street vendors face the prospect of removal, merchandise displayed outside larger commercial establishments continues to occupy parts of some footpaths, raising concerns about consistent enforcement and equitable use of public land.
The issue comes as the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) intensifies its citywide effort to restore pedestrian corridors. Officials have been directed to complete remaining footpath clearance work by August 30, with enforcement also aimed at preventing encroachments from returning after removal.Shivajinagar illustrates why the task is more complicated than simply removing structures. The locality combines dense retail activity, heavy pedestrian movement, public transport connections and long-established informal commerce. When shop displays or temporary stalls consume walking space, pedestrians can be pushed towards busy carriageways, reducing accessibility and increasing exposure to traffic. Recent clearance operations elsewhere in central Bengaluru demonstrate the scale of the intervention. More than 150 unauthorised shops were removed near the Victoria Hospital compound wall, while a separate operation around KR Market cleared 233 structures from roads and footpaths. But enforcement also raises a livelihood question. Street vendors argue that clearance without clearly identified vending spaces can leave households without a practical means of earning. The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 provides a framework for regulating vending while recognising livelihood interests, making survey, certification and designated vending areas important parts of a durable solution.
The tension is particularly sharp when commercial establishments and informal vendors appear to face different levels of scrutiny. Urban governance experts have long argued that pedestrian space should be protected consistently, regardless of whether an obstruction comes from a permanent shop, a temporary stall or another commercial activity. For Bengaluru footpath encroachments, enforcement alone is unlikely to deliver lasting results. The city’s own recent experience shows that cleared spaces can be occupied again unless monitoring, physical design and legal vending arrangements follow the initial drive. Authorities have already acknowledged the need for continued surveillance and action against repeat violations. A more durable approach would separate two objectives that are often treated as one: keeping pedestrian paths unobstructed and protecting legitimate livelihoods. Clearly marked vending zones, accessible commercial loading areas, enforceable limits for shop displays and continuous footpath maintenance could help reconcile those needs.
For Bengaluru footpath encroachments, the real test is therefore not how many obstructions are removed in a campaign, but whether public space remains accessible afterwards. A successful urban street must work for pedestrians first while giving small businesses and formal retailers predictable, transparent rules for using the space around it.
