Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Aditya, Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Mr. Kailash Jha, Mr. Bibhuti Bhushan Mishra, Mr. Anjani Kumar
Mishra & Mr. Dipak Raj, Advocates.
For the Respondents : Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD with
Ms. Preeti Giri, Ms. Chetna Dhudheria, Advocates for
MCD.
Mr. Mohit Bhardwaj, Advocate for GNCTD.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL
1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, has been instituted on behalf of the petitioner, praying as follows:- ‘In the facts and circumstances stated herein above, it is Most Respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to:
I. Pass an order directing the respondents to allow the petitioner street vendor to peacefully vend in terms of the Certificate of Vending issued to him.
II. Pass an Order directing the respondents to ensure that the petitioner is allowed to peacefully vend on his vending site i.e., On the Footpath, Near Old Delhi Railway Station, S.P.M Marg, City- SP Zone, ward-84-N without any hindrance being caused by any public official.
III. Pass an order directing the respondents, their officials, their agents etc. be restrained from harassing the petitioner from peacefully vending at his vending site.
IV. Pass an order directing the respondent MCD to correct the nomenclature in the column for Type of Vendor from "Others" to "Stationary Street Vendor" (in view of the Section 6 of the Act) as detailed in the vending certificate issued to the petitioner.
V. Pass an order for quashing and setting aside the terms of certificate of vending printed at the back side of the vending certificate to the extent which is not applicable to a stationary street vendor.
VI. Pass an order directing the TVC, City SP Zone to decide the representation dated 10.08.2023 made by the petitioner for declaring him as a Stationary Street Vendor in terms of the Section 6 of the Act.
VII. Pass any such directions or order that this Hon'ble
AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONERS ARE DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.’
2. Issue notice.
3. Ms. Tajinder Virdi, learned Standing Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the MCD and Mr. Mohit Bhardwaj, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the GNCTD.
4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the MCD, has invited our attention to the terms and conditions, permitting the petitioner to vend.
5. For the sake of completeness, the said terms and conditions attached to the Certificate of Vending, are reproduced herein below:-
6. In terms of the Certificate of Vending issued to the petitioner, it is clearly stipulated that he cannot vend from any particular location, contrary to the express terms of Clause no. ‘11’, of the said Certificate of Vending. It is further observed that since the Town Vending Committee (TVC) is yet to fix a time limit, providing for a period, during which a vendor can vend from any particular spot, the stipulation of 30 minutes time, contained in the said clause, is binding on the petitioner, at this stage. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner states, that he does not pray for the relief of running his business from any particular vending site, within the zone where he has been permitted to vend by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, and further, the limited relief that is prayed for, is to permit the petitioner to vend strictly, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Certificate of Vending dated 07.11.2021, issued by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi.
7. It is an admitted position that the Town Vending Committee (TVC), has in terms of the directions issued by this Court, from time to time, as well as, in terms of the mandate of Section 3 (Survey of street vendors and protection from eviction on relocation) and Section 4 (Issue of certificate of vending) of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, carried out a survey, in some of the areas under the MCD zones; pursuant to which, the petitioner, namely, Mohd Sajjiad, has been issued certificate of vending dated 07.11.2021 (URI: 9647499), which is annexed as Annexure P-4, to the present writ petition.
8. In view of the foregoing, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, categorically limits the relief in the present writ petition, to a direction to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, to permit Mohd Sajjiad, to continue to vend within City-SP Zone, Ward-84-N, strictly and scrupulously in compliance with the terms and conditions of the said certificate of vending, particularly Clause no. 11, and in accordance with law.
9. In view of the above, the present writ petition is partly allowed; and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi is directed to permit Mohd Sajjiad, the petitioner herein, to vend within City-SP Zone, Ward-84- N, subject to the terms and conditions of the aforementioned certificate of vending dated 07.11.2021, without any let or hindrance.
10. Needless to state that the petitioner will be at liberty to articulate the difficulties faced by him, before the appropriate authorities, in accordance with law, in relation to the certificate of vending, insofar as it employs the expression ‘Others’.
11. No further directions are prayed for.
12. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
13. A copy of this judgment be uploaded on the website of this Court forthwith.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL (JUDGE)
ANISH DAYAL (JUDGE) AUGUST 16, 2023 Click here to check corrigendum, if any