Suganpandey v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation

Delhi High Court · 19 Dec 2016 · 2016:DHC:9296-DB
G. S. Sistani; Vinod Goel
W.P.(C) 6696/2015
administrative petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court disposed of petitions by long-standing street vendors seeking protection from interference, granting liberty to approach the court if their vending rights are threatened in the future.

Full Text
Translation output
$-39,41, 42, 43, 48, 50, 51, 52, 53, 64,17, 18, 19
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
dated19"'December, 2016
W.P.(C) 6696/2015
SUGANPANDEY Petitioner
Through Mr. Krishna Kumar Singh, Advocate
versus
SOUTHDELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANR.
Respondents
Through Mr. Devendra Kumar and Mr. Prashant Verma, Advocates for SDMC.
Mr. Naushad Ahmed Khan, ASC with .^rff®assMs~.®Hancy Wadhwa, Advocate for
WP m 6700/2515-- ^ % -t- 0/uu|zui^^ iS',. % RAMPIIER^AOTEY ' Petitioner
/ Througtfc^SErki^i^a Kunw%iri|h, Advocate i versus Ww9ti^iW §
• i 1
SOUTH DELHI MUNICipif &ANl^ \ .#. Respondents ifhrpugh'' De|/fen#a^^umar and Mr. Prashant - /0;A •4'vlV
W.P.(C) 6701/2q|^5^x.
RAVrLEKHRAX^%!^^^fe3^?T Petitioner ThiBiaM£'t''Mrf']^shn#KumarSingh, Advocate
versus
SOUTH DEI.HI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANR.
Through hXr. Devendra Kumar and Mr. Prashant Ms. Hancy Wadhwa, Advocate for
GNCTD.
, W.P.(C) 6727/2015 SHIV PRASAD GUPTA Petitioner
Through Mr. Krishna. Kumar Singh, Advocate
W.P.(C) 6696/2015 etc. Page 1 of6
2016:DHC:9296-DB 3/
versus
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION &ANR
Through Mr. Devendra Kumar and Mr. Prashant GNCTD.
W.P.(C) 5982/2016
LAI.MAN GUPTA ••••• Petitioner
••-wjy
NORTH ^ i Througi^iii&^in Sabhar^k Standing I- mic%
W.P.(C) #10/2016 \
RAMMIIIaN IIiry?l f/ §•••• Petitioner
versus
.el' w.
•p. feL I i &
T\ --gill 1 •)! L'^'^ 4^"^ 'W
•3 V
NORTH DELHI,ppIiClPAL,^)gJ^^ ANR TmBtig^^^^t^^^^Stbharwal,Standing
Cdunsei for North DMC
W.P.(C) 6011/2016
SATYA NARAYAN Petitioner
versus
NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANR
Through Mr. Rajan Sabharwal, Standing Counsel for North DMC
W.P.(C) 6012/2016
ASHOK KUMAR Petitioner
W.P.(C) 6696/2015 etc. Page 2 of6
ThroughIi3'Ml.ll&ishna Kumar Singh, Advocate ff
versus
NORTHDELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANR
Through Mr. Rajan Sabharwal, Standing Counsel for North DMC
W.P.(C) 6025/2016
MOHAN LAL, • .....Petitioner
NORTH DELHIjMUM^P'M.'CORPORA ANR //' Respondents f ,,, ;Mi.' RajM Sabhai^'al,'Standing ff ''v:^'V'''''iCpunsej^for Nort^^ w.p,(c)(^4®)i5
RAJNESli = !}.... Petitioner
^ •.« . f-'-. , r' 'j' If
I Through .•Mr./Krishna Kumar Singh, Advocate
I o i - ^ V B
•| versus f,' •"f,'r ''A 0
\\ i •, ' 'if ,r
V-< \ / H \ ' i ^ -B' SOUTH DEito||^|^|HfiL and Mr. Prashant S^'^f-Merma' Advocates for SDMC.
Ml-. Naushad Ahmed Khan, ASC with GNCTD.
W.P.(C) 6697/2015
SHYAMLAL Petitioner
Through ' Mr. Krishna Kumar Singh, Advocate
versus
SOUTH DELHI WJNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR W.P,(C) 6696/2015 etc. , . Page3 of6
Through Mr. G.D. Mishra, Standing Counsel for
SDMC.
W.P.(C) 6707/2015
ROOPRAM Petitioner
versus
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONAND ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. G.D. Mishra, Standing Counsel for
SDMC.
W^P.(C) 6748/2015 VIJAYPAL Petitioner Thfoughi RffMrrKrishhIr-Kumar Singh, Advocate
versus
/f /f SOUTHDELHKtoNICI]|^fgR|.§I^ A^lANR.
C 1)^
// •=£ ..Vj,. Respondents
ThrougSM?^i|i^Gfc Mishra, Standing Counsel for liliDMi. r
I m I m, !\ I
HON'BLENmR. #
HON'BLE MR^STICE VINOD GO•EL^M^^"^./
'J
CORAM: W ^ ^G.S.SISTANI. J (ORAL) 325^

1. Present petitions have been instituted by as many as 13 petitioners. As per the petition, the petitioner in W.P.(C).6696/2015 claims to be vending along footpath behind G-14, NDSC, Part-I, New Delhi since

1984. As per the petition, the petitioner in W.P.(C).6700/2015 claims to be vending at pavement hear Hanuman Mandir, New Market, Malviya Nagar since 1995. As per the petition, the petitioner in W.P.(C).6701/2015 claims to be vending at pavement opposite S-23, Main Market, Greet Park, New Delhi since 1994. As per the petition. W.P.(C) 6696/2015 etc. Page 4 of[6] V/ the petitioner in W.P.(C).6727/2015 claims to be vending at footpath behind Shop No.37, J-Block Market, Saket, New Delhi since 2001. As per the petition, the petitioner in W.P.(C).5982/2016 claims to be vending at pavement near 15A/27, WEA, Ajmal BChan Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi for the last more than 20 years. As per the petition, the petitioner in W.P.(C).6010/2016 claims to be vending near Durga Mandir, Gafar Market, Karol Bagh, New Delhi for the last about more than 15 years. As per the petition, the petitioner in W.P.(C).6011/2016 cbdims to be vending at pavement being Stall No.73, Gaffar Market, Arya Sam^ Road, the last about more than 25 years." As pi# the^fttitiin,'tie p€f#on^^%^W.P.(C).6012/2016 //, claims to be(^eh|ing at[4])af%i§|%mep Gali^o^, Swaraj Saree Centre, Bidimpiifa, Bagl^i,Ne^ Delhi for the ^ 3' last aboutlmm-e than 25 the petition, the petitioner m W.P.(C).6b25/2016 claims Mri/Wtading at pavemerft near 13/30, f V'i V ^I' ^ WEA, RalhnaBuilding, AjmlLitt^||&)ad, Karol Bagh,l^ewDelhi for the last about 3.0C^#af^^'#-:%er>^^f^itipn, the petitioner m W.P.(C).6694^2|BS1Jlaims^to be vending€^^^akikat Park, Opposite Eros Cinema, Jahgpdm;®fensi0n;5:iI§Je^ the last about 18 '*0^ s -s •• " p«iaP ^,:P years. As per the petitiori7tEe^etiti0'n'eFln W.P.(C). 6697/2015 claims to be vending at pavement near Hanuman Mandir, SewaNagar Chowk, New Delhi since 1983. As per the.petition, the petitioner in W.P.(C). 6707/2015 claims to be vending at pavement, near Jain Electronics, BhogalChowk, Bhogal, New Delhisince 1975. As per the petition, the petitioner in W.P.(C). 6748/2015 claims to be vending at pavement, near Azad General Store, Bhogal Road Chowk, Bhogal, New Delhi since 2004.

2. The relief prayed in these petitions is common that the respondents be W.P.(C) 6696/2015 etc. Page 5 of[6] V directed not to interfere with the vending activities carried out by them.

3. Counsel for the petitioners submits that all the petitioners will not occupy more than the prescribed area of 6 ft x 4 ft and also comply with all the norms of the SDMC. He submits that for the present, the petitioners are not being disturbed. He submits that he has instructions to withdraw all the present petitions with liberty to file fresh petitions in case there is any threat of their dispossession or their possession is disturbed.

4. The petitions and the applfeatiohs"sfandKdisposed of, with liberty as prayed.

5. All pending appUc&tions aIsd-st£dyd>;^si5bsedo£^->" I' %.?• % I • I si vV'K r*" 4 I ^hl ffl ii I i I I§\ III,, 'R vV/viAV'! „—./ I GiS.SISTANI,J. fj v.\. V iC'-i •\V '' yp' 4: VINOD GOEL, J. DECEMBER 19, 2016 pst