Smt. Phoolo Devi @ Phoolwati v. New Delhi Municipal Council And ANR.

$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 614/2018 & C.M.2692/2018 (stay) SMT. PHOOLO DEVI @ PHOOLWATI ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Nagender Vashisht, Advocate versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr.Vivek Aggarwal, standing counsel for NDMC.

Mr.Raghvendra Pandey, Adv. for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL

O R D E R

% 08.08.2018 The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226 and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner claims to be a regular street vendor and squatting at the Backside of Bank of Baroda, in front of Telephone Junction Box, Janpath Market, Janpath Lane, New Delhi in the NDMC area since 1980 and selling readymade items. Prayers made in the writ petition are as under:

A.

To allow the petitioner to operate her trade at her squatting site i.e. Backside of Bank of Baroda, in front of Telephone Junction Box, Janpath Market, Janpath Lane, New Delhi till the certificate of vending has been issued to petitioner as per the provisions of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 B.

To direct the respondents not to dispossess or obstruct or disturb the petitioner in carrying on her trade from her vending site i.e. Backside of Bank of Baroda, in front of Telephone Junction Box, Janpath Market, Janpath Lane, New Delhi in terms of Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India as well as in terms of the

provisions of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 and the orders passed by this Court from time to time; and C.

To direct the respondents to collect the CCTV footage of all the CCTV cameras installed nearby to the squatting site i.e. Backside of Bank of Baroda, in front of Telephone Junction Box, Janpath Market, Janpath Lane, New Delhi of the petitioner, in order to clarify the real and true facts about the long term squatting activity of the petitioner herein.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that he has instructions to withdraw this writ petition in view of the stand taken by the NDMC in para 8 of the counter affidavit.

Accordingly, the writ petition and C.M.2692/2018 are dismissed as not pressed.

G.S.SISTANI, J SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J AUGUST 08, 2018 rb / W.P.(C) 614/2018