By Tarushi Tewari
INTRODUCTION
The case New Delhi Traders Association v. GNCTD revolves around the implementation of Street vendors Act, 2014 in NCT of Delhi. A Division Bench of Delhi HC comprising of Justice Vipin Sanghvi and Justice Jasmeet Singh observed that the implementation and the arrangement of this act by the Government of NCT of Delhi is very poor.
THE ISSUE AT HAND
The Delhi High court heard pleas concerning alleged illegal vendor activities regarding street vendors in Delhi. The bench pulled up the Delhi government for what it considered to be a case of poor planning regarding the allocation for street vendors.
The Street Vendors Act, 2014 mandates the formation of Town Vending Committees (“TVC”). Under this act Delhi also has one such committee. However, the bench observed that the committee does not work properly, as it does not have adequate representation. Important markets like Sarojini Nagar and Connaught Place have been left out and are not represented in the TVC. According to the bench a committee cannot promote its own interests. Also it says that markets can have a maximum of 40% representation in the committee.
The bench also ordered the TVC to make an effective plan regarding the organisation of street vendors .In its words “Some things you will not compromise, like right of people to walk in market areas, hygiene, security. All these aspects will have to be looked into while planning”.
The Division Bench said that Delhi needs to be a clean city and at the same time the rights of the hawkers should be respected. Senior Advocate Rahul Mehra, who represented the Delhi Government alleged that the Municipal Authorities misinterpreted the orders regarding the removal of street vendors. He believes that Delhi needs to be a green and clean city but not at the cost of voiceless vendors. He argued that the police seizes their goods and dislocates them whenever a judicial order is passed. This is an issue that needs to be addressed.
The court said that the fundamental Right of the Street vendors is inviolable but not absolute and it needs to be balanced in order to harmoniously interpret conflicting rights of individuals iner se.
The Government of NCT of Delhi has been asked by Delhi High Court to file a counter affidavit and has been asked to justify the presence of the New Delhi Municipal Town Vending Committees.[1]
LATEST UPDATE
Rahul Mehra, the lawyer representing the Delhi Government requested the Court to grant 3 months time to the Delhi Government to find a solution to this issue. The Delhi High Court refused the request stating that even 1 day is too long a time period to find a solution now. It chastised the Delhi Government for the unregulated vendors in Connaught Place (CP) as this restricts the movements of the consumers to the shops and it causes a hygiene and law and order situation. It reiterated its earlier statement that that while it recognises the role of hawkers in the ecosystem and respects their rights, these rights are not absolute.[2]
STREET VENDORS ACT, 2014
- The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Rights of Street Vendors) Act was passed in 2014.This act was made to protect the right of street vendors in urban areas and to regulate vending activities. The Town Vending Committees are governed by this act.
- Section 12 of the Act states that vendors can set their business in any area barring those marked as a ‘No-vending zone.’ .Section 13 provides the Vendors with the Right of Relocation.
- Section 18, could be relevant to this case as it concerns the eviction of street vendors. It gives the power to the TVC’s to remove street vendors from particular places and to relocate them. The vendors have to be given a notice of 30 days regarding eviction and the municipal authorities may not remove the vendor physically unless he/she fails to remove it by the deadline. The vendor will be penalized with a fine of Rs.250 per day after the expiration of the specific time period. It empowers the committee to evict those vendors whose certificate of vending is cancelled under section 10 of the Act.
- Section 19 says that the goods of the vendors may be seized if the vendor does not vacate a certain area before the specified time period.
- According to Section 22, a TVC shall have a chairperson who can be Municipal Commissioner or the Chief Executive Officer and there shall be other members as nominated by appropriate government representing traffic police, medical officer, the planning authority, an association of street traders, an association of market traders, community interest organization, resident welfare organizations, banks and any other such organisation that is for the welfare of the street vendors.
[3]
CONCLUSION
Efficient management is important in running a city. Finding a middle path to balance people’s rights and maintaining the city’s law and order, hygiene and beauty is a major chunk of this component. The Government of NCT’s alleged mismanagement has caused a imbalance in this vital component of administration and development in the country, further this problem is exacerbated by the concerned government’s delay in chalking out an efficient plan which would respect the rights of the hawkers and also maintain the order and the aesthetic component of the city. Overcrowding and lack order need to be curbed.
[1] Livelaw.com
[2] Abhinav Garg, ‘Can’t let city go to dogs’:HC frets over hawkers, ’The Times of India’ November 18,2021
[3] Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014,bare act,bareactlive.com
Leave a Reply