Full Text
#S-39, S-40 & S-42 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
REKHA DEVI & ORS. ..... Petitioners
S-40
VINOD KUMAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners
S-42
ANUJ KUMAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the petitioner : Mr. V.K. Mishra and Ms. Monika Sharma, Advocates.
For the respondent: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing Counsel for MCD in W.P.(C) 7189/2022.
2022:DHC:2830-DB Ms. Puja Kalra, Standing Counsel for MCD in
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA
CM APPL. 22032/2022 (Exemption) in W.P.(C) 7189/2022
Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
The applications stand disposed of.
1. With the consent of learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties, these writ petitions have been heard finally and are being disposed of by this common order.
2. We have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the pleadings on the record.
3. These similar writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, have been instituted by duly appointed members of the Town Vending Committee (hereinafter “TVC”) by the Municipal Corporation.
4. The solitary relief canvassed before us, is to the effect that, as duly appointed members of the TVC, the petitioners, are entitled to receive such allowances as may be prescribed, in accordance with law.
5. The provision of Section 22 of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 (“SV Act”), dealing with the appointment and terms and conditions of service of members nominated to the TVC, stipulates as follows:-
6. It is observed that, Section 2(h) of the Act defines “prescribed” as:- (h) “prescribed” means prescribed by rules made under this Act by the appropriate Government;
7. It is an admitted position that, pursuant to coming into force of the said Act, the appropriate Government i.e. the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, has enacted Delhi Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the „said Rules‟), providing for protection of livelihood and regulation of street vending w.e.f. 11.01.2018.
8. It is observed that, Rule 18 of the said Rules, provides as follows:- “18. Allowances of the members of Town Vending Committee The allowances payable to the members of a Town Vending Committee, who do not hold any office of profit, shall be at the rate to be fixed by the concerned Commissioner/Chairperson/CEO of the Local Authority from time to time.”
9. Upon a conjoint reading of the above extracted provisions of the law, we are of the considered view that, except for members of the TVC, who hold an office of profit; the other nominated members are entitled to allowances at the rate to be fixed by the concerned Commissioner of the Local Authority i.e. Municipal Corporation in the instant case, in terms of the provisions of Section 2(c) of the Act.
10. It is further noted that the respondent No. 1/Government of NCT of Delhi, in W.P. (C) No. 4002/2022, titled ‘Anuj Kumar & Ors. vs. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.’, in an affidavit dated 09.05.2022, authored by Mr. Rajender Kumar Ahuja, Deputy Director (Local Bodies), Government of NCT of Delhi, at para 4 and 5, it has been stated;-
11. We, therefore, direct the Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, to fix the allowances payable to the petitioners, as nominated members of the concerned TVC, forthwith, in accordance with law.
12. No further reliefs are prayed for.
13. With the above direction, the writ petitions are partly allowed and disposed of.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL (JUDGE)
AMIT SHARMA (JUDGE) JULY 19, 2022 Click here to check corrigendum, if any