Manoj Kumar v. Commissioner Of Police And ORS
$~62, 64 and 65 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2534/2024 BIJENDER SINGH ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr.Aditya, Mr.Kailash Kr Jha and Mr.Anjani Kumar Mishra, Advocates.
versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS ..... Respondent Through:
Mr.Divyam Nandrajog, Panel Counsel for GNCTD and Mr.Mayank Kamra, Advocate for R1, R4 and R5.
Mr.Badar Mahmood, SC for R2 and R3/MCD.
(64) + W.P.(C) 2536/2024 MANOJ KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr.Aditya, Mr.Kailash Kr Jha and Mr.Anjani Kumar Mishra, Advocates.
versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS ..... Respondent Through:
Mr.Divyam Nandrajog, Panel Counsel for GNCTD and Mr.Mayank Kamra, Advocate for R1, R4 and R5.
Ms.Shilpa Ohri, ASC for MCD.
(65) + W.P.(C) 2538/2024 SAROJ KUMAR SINGH ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr.Aditya, Mr.Kailash Kr Jha and Mr.Anjani Kumar Mishra, Advocates.
versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS ..... Respondent Through:
Mr.Divyam Nandrajog, Panel Counsel for GNCTD and Mr.Mayank Kamra, Advocate for R1, R4 and R5.
Ms.Khusbhoo Nahar, ASC, MCD and The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
Mr.R.K.Bansal, AO and Mr.Kamal, LI, Karol Bagh Zone/R2 and R3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
O R D E R
% 20.02.2024 1.
The petitioners are street vendors and have filed the above petitions, inter alia, praying that they be not disturbed in carrying on their vending activities on various locations in Sangam Vihar, Central Zone, Ward S-85, New Delhi.
2.
The petitioners have been issued Certificate of Vending (COV) by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. The petitioners have sought a direction that the nomenclature in the COV be corrected to read as "Stationary Vendor". 3.
The petitioners are, essentially, aggrieved as they are not being permitted to vend at their sites. They are being called upon by the concerned respondents to re-locate from their vending location every thirty minutes. The said stipulation is contained in Clause 11 of the Terms and Conditions applicable to the COV issued to the petitioners. 4.
The petitioners have also sought a direction that they be not removed from their vending sites and that they declared as "Stationary Street Vendor".
5.
We are not persuaded to accept the same.
6.
Admittedly, no specific site was allotted to the petitioners. The petitioners are also not vending from a permanent or semi-permanent structure. Thus, till a decision is taken by the TVC, the petitioners are required to be considered as Mobile Vendors.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
7.
Having stated the above, we are of the view that the petitioners have highlighted a serious issue that requires consideration by the concerned authorities. Calling upon the Mobile Vendors to move or relocate every thirty minutes would inevitably put a higher pressure on the streets, in addition to causing some amount of inconvenience to the vendors. 8.
Section 6(1) of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014 (hereafter the Act') expressly provides that the COV can be issued under three categories:- a.
Stationary vendor;
b.
Mobile vendor; or c.
Any other category as may be specified under the Scheme. 9.
Undisputedly, the COV is required to be in terms of the Act and thus, must clearly classify the category of the street vendors. 10.
It is also noted that the petitioners are engaged in vending goods that fall in the category of "Others".
11.
As noted above, the petitioners have already filed representations with the TVC. It would be necessary for the TVC to take an appropriate decision in this regard till the survey is completed and a vending plan is put in place. 12.
In the meanwhile, we direct that the respondents shall not obstruct or disturb the petitioners from carrying on their vending activities provided the same are carried on in accordance with the terms and conditions of the COV.
13.
Accordingly, we dispose of the present petitions by directing the concerned TVC to consider the representations moved by the petitioners and take an informed decision. The denial of relief as sought for by the petitioners, by this Court would not preclude the TVC from considering the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
same.
14.
The petitions stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms. VIBHU BAKHRU, J TARA VITASTA GANJU, J FEBRUARY 20, 2024 M The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.