Full Text
Translation output
■ t
>' $-21 &24 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(01042/2015&CM No.1832/2015
Petitioner
Through: MsNehaRajpal,AdvocateforMr Anand Shailani,Advocate.
>' $-21 &24 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(01042/2015&CM No.1832/2015
Petitioner
Through: MsNehaRajpal,AdvocateforMr Anand Shailani,Advocate.
VERSUS
newDELHIMUNICIPALCOUNCIL&ANR. Respondents
Through: Mr ArjunPant,Advocatetor K- 1/NDMC.
MrRajeev Sharma,AdvocateforR- 2/Delhi Police.
Through: Mr ArjunPant,Advocatetor K- 1/NDMC.
MrRajeev Sharma,AdvocateforR- 2/Delhi Police.
AND
W P.rC^ 1066/^nif>&CM Nn.l889/2015 SARVJEETKAUR ...^.Petitioner
Through: MrM.M.Kashyap,Advocate.
W P.rC^ 1066/^nif>&CM Nn.l889/2015 SARVJEETKAUR ...^.Petitioner
Through: MrM.M.Kashyap,Advocate.
VERSUS
SOUTHDELHIMUNICIPALCOPROATION f
Through: MsPujaKalra,AdvocateforSDMC.
Through: MsPujaKalra,AdvocateforSDMC.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
ORDER o/„ 04.02.2015
The petitioners havefiled the present petitions seeking an injunction
' restraining the respondents from disturbing the petitioners in carrying on with their respective trades.The petitioners claim to be squatters who are carrying on their respectivetrades on the streets. This is disputed by the learned counsel for the respondents. The learned counsel for the parties pointoutthatseveralsimilar petitions have been considered bythis Court and have been disposed ofwith adirection,enablingthepetitionersto representations before the Committee to be constituted under the Street
2015:DHC:11595 Vendors(Protection ofLivelihood and Regulation ofStreet Vending)Act
2014(hereafterthe'Act)whichhascomeintoforce w.e.f,04.03.2014. The learned counsel for the petitioners rely upon one such order passed in
W.P.(C)No.5580/2014,whichreadsasunder:- "Presentwritpetitions havebeen filed seekingadirection o the respondents not to obstruct or disturb the petitioners in c^mgon theirtrade from theirrespective sitestill theTo™
Vending Committee ofNDMCissues certificate ofvendingfS?
V accordance with Section 3(3) of the Street endors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street
Vending)Act,2014(hereinafterreferredtoas'Act•2014')?nd ■ m tenns oforder dated 09th September,2013 p^sed bjthe *
Supreme Court in Maharashtra Ekta Hawkers Union and
Z!!7oilwTc^E32r''''''''"' """ 4U A counsel for petitioners relies on Section 3(3)of judgmentS
UnionandAnother(supra)whereinithasbeenheldasunder:- facilitating implementation ofthe 2009 ^
Policy, yveissue thefollowingdirections:
XXXX XXXX vvw dkJiXJt XXXX XXXX » (xv) All the existing street vendors / hawkers ^ operating across the country shall be allowed to operate till the exercise ofregistration and creation t""Zonl/ zones is completed in terms of the2009Policy Oncethatexerciseiscompleted,they shall be entitled to operate only in accordance with
Vending Learned counsel for respondent-NDMC who apnears on advance notice, states that the petitioners are norexisting
Al ^ S squatters and are, therefore, not entitled to protection under
®''''°LelLdc^oWftrespondent-NDMCfortherstateste in accordance with the Act,2014,petitioners should raise their grievances before the Town Vending Committee (hereinafter referred to as'Committee'). , ,.u +
Learned counsel for respondent-NDMC also states tha though the Committee has been appointed, yet it is not
"ifr^Teained counsel for petitioners vehemendy disputes the contentions advanced by learned counsel or respondent^M^^learnedcounselforparties,thisCourtisof
• the view that disputed questions of fact are involved m the present petitions.This Courtis also ofthe"P™"" ofthe Act,2014 having come into force on 4th March,2 , theappropriateforumtodecidethelisbetweenthepartiesisth
Comm^ttee.^^^ 2014 providesfor constitution ofa Committee which is to conduct survey of all f f make the scheme for relocation. Section 3(3)ofthe Act,2014 clearly statesthatno street vendor shall be evicted or till survey specified under sub-Section(l)has """P^ and the certificate of vending has been issued to all street
"'"''"Consequently,therespondent-NDMCisdirectedtomake theCommitteefunctionalas within eight«^*s.Petitionem^^^ permitted to file their representations with the Committe within aperiod ofeightweeks. rnmTnittee
Upon the said representations being filed,the Committee is directed to decide the same expeditiously,preferably wit m
SIX aforesaid directions, present writ petitions and applications are disposed of."
The learned counsel for the respondents submitthat although it had been stated thata Committee underthe Act had been appointed,however. jT thecorrectfactisthattheCommitteeisvettoh outthatthedirectionshavealready be oftheCommitteei„atime o^
-factionalafterapeftodoft^lr" ~ apphcii:;::::;"™ wp.<c, t~ representationstotheCommitt ^ Permitted t^'make u- j^RUARY04,2015 VIBHUBAKHRU,J
/ /
ORDER o/„ 04.02.2015
The petitioners havefiled the present petitions seeking an injunction
' restraining the respondents from disturbing the petitioners in carrying on with their respective trades.The petitioners claim to be squatters who are carrying on their respectivetrades on the streets. This is disputed by the learned counsel for the respondents. The learned counsel for the parties pointoutthatseveralsimilar petitions have been considered bythis Court and have been disposed ofwith adirection,enablingthepetitionersto representations before the Committee to be constituted under the Street
2015:DHC:11595 Vendors(Protection ofLivelihood and Regulation ofStreet Vending)Act
2014(hereafterthe'Act)whichhascomeintoforce w.e.f,04.03.2014. The learned counsel for the petitioners rely upon one such order passed in
W.P.(C)No.5580/2014,whichreadsasunder:- "Presentwritpetitions havebeen filed seekingadirection o the respondents not to obstruct or disturb the petitioners in c^mgon theirtrade from theirrespective sitestill theTo™
Vending Committee ofNDMCissues certificate ofvendingfS?
V accordance with Section 3(3) of the Street endors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street
Vending)Act,2014(hereinafterreferredtoas'Act•2014')?nd ■ m tenns oforder dated 09th September,2013 p^sed bjthe *
Supreme Court in Maharashtra Ekta Hawkers Union and
Z!!7oilwTc^E32r''''''''"' """ 4U A counsel for petitioners relies on Section 3(3)of judgmentS
UnionandAnother(supra)whereinithasbeenheldasunder:- facilitating implementation ofthe 2009 ^
Policy, yveissue thefollowingdirections:
XXXX XXXX vvw dkJiXJt XXXX XXXX » (xv) All the existing street vendors / hawkers ^ operating across the country shall be allowed to operate till the exercise ofregistration and creation t""Zonl/ zones is completed in terms of the2009Policy Oncethatexerciseiscompleted,they shall be entitled to operate only in accordance with
Vending Learned counsel for respondent-NDMC who apnears on advance notice, states that the petitioners are norexisting
Al ^ S squatters and are, therefore, not entitled to protection under
®''''°LelLdc^oWftrespondent-NDMCfortherstateste in accordance with the Act,2014,petitioners should raise their grievances before the Town Vending Committee (hereinafter referred to as'Committee'). , ,.u +
Learned counsel for respondent-NDMC also states tha though the Committee has been appointed, yet it is not
"ifr^Teained counsel for petitioners vehemendy disputes the contentions advanced by learned counsel or respondent^M^^learnedcounselforparties,thisCourtisof
• the view that disputed questions of fact are involved m the present petitions.This Courtis also ofthe"P™"" ofthe Act,2014 having come into force on 4th March,2 , theappropriateforumtodecidethelisbetweenthepartiesisth
Comm^ttee.^^^ 2014 providesfor constitution ofa Committee which is to conduct survey of all f f make the scheme for relocation. Section 3(3)ofthe Act,2014 clearly statesthatno street vendor shall be evicted or till survey specified under sub-Section(l)has """P^ and the certificate of vending has been issued to all street
"'"''"Consequently,therespondent-NDMCisdirectedtomake theCommitteefunctionalas within eight«^*s.Petitionem^^^ permitted to file their representations with the Committe within aperiod ofeightweeks. rnmTnittee
Upon the said representations being filed,the Committee is directed to decide the same expeditiously,preferably wit m
SIX aforesaid directions, present writ petitions and applications are disposed of."
The learned counsel for the respondents submitthat although it had been stated thata Committee underthe Act had been appointed,however. jT thecorrectfactisthattheCommitteeisvettoh outthatthedirectionshavealready be oftheCommitteei„atime o^
-factionalafterapeftodoft^lr" ~ apphcii:;::::;"™ wp.<c, t~ representationstotheCommitt ^ Permitted t^'make u- j^RUARY04,2015 VIBHUBAKHRU,J
/ /
JUDGMENT