Mrs. Yashoda Devi v. Mr. Rajpal Singh & ORS.
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 518/2023 CM APPL. 13987/2024 CM APPL. 30896/2024 CM APPL. 52310/2024 MRS. YASHODA DEVI .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. K.C. Aggarwal, Adv. (thru VC) versus MR. RAJPAL SINGH & ORS.
.....Respondent Through:
Ms. Beenashaw Soni, SC for MCD with Ms. Ann Joseph, Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Singh & Mr. Awdesh Kumar, Advs. for R-6
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL
O R D E R
% 18.03.2025 1.
Pursuant to the previous order dated 9th September 2024, petitioner who is an old lady, is present before this Court along with her son Santosh Kumar and is assisted by her counsel, Mr. K.C. Aggarwal, who appears through VC.
2.
Counsel for petitioner states that for the last about 35 to 40 years, petitioner has been vending behind Shop Nos. 1 & 2, C Block market, East of Kailash, on the side lines of Raja Dheer Sen Marg. 3.
It is contended that petitioner has been continuously harassed by MCD officials at the behest of the owner of Shop no.1, 2 and 3 (respondent no. 7).
4.
The order in question for contempt is dated 8th February 2023 passed The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
in W.P. (C) 1596/2023 by the Division Bench of this Court. 5.
It is recorded in the said order as under:
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
6.
Status report has been filed by the Standing Counsel for MCD and she states that the 'Certificate of Vending' ('CoV') of petitioner, in particular, Clause 11 of the same, prevents her from being stationed at a particular place. Clause 11 of the vending certificate, reads as under: "The mobile vendor will stay upto 30 minutes for vending at any hawking/ vending zone or as decided by the Town Vending. ...." 7.
She further states that MCD cannot permit violations of CoV and there is no animus against the petitioner, in particular. 8.
She draws attention to the photographs appended with the status report to show that petitioner has set up her vending unit at a particular place and therefore, objection has been taken by MCD officials. 9.
Petitioner's counsel however states that order dated 8th February 2023 was passed on the basis that petitioner was vending on a stationary/ particular spot for the last 40 years and therefore, protection was given. 10.
In the opinion of this Court, Order dated 8th February 2023 merely states that petitioner will be permitted to continue to vend without any hindrance, in accordance with terms and conditions of CoV dated 6th November 2021.
11.
Considering the conditions as contained in CoV, petitioner is at liberty to approach the Roster Bench and seek clarification in W.P. (C) 1596/2023, for his purpose.
12.
In the meantime, petitioner shall continue to comply with terms and conditions of CoV.
13.
It is however directed that considering the advanced age of petitioner, there will be no unnecessary harassment meted out to her either by MCD officials or by respondent no.7, in any manner whatsoever. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
14.
Counsel for petitioner states that respondent no.7 has installed a camera in order to record the going-ons, at the petitioner's vending site, as and when she is present there.
15.
Counsel for respondent no.7, on instructions, undertakes that camera, if any, was for security purposes and will not invade the privacy of petitioner as and when she is present at her vending site. Respondent no. 7 shall remain bound by this undertaking.
16.
This petition is disposed of with above directions, with liberty to petitioner, as noted above.
17.
Pending applications are disposed of as infructuous. 18.
Order be uploaded on the website of this Court. ANISH DAYAL, J MARCH 18, 2025/sm/kp The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.