Jeet Sehgal v. New Delhi Municipal Council & ANR.

$~9 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 6033/2024 JEET SEHGAL .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Bharat Aggarwal, Mr. Kanhaiya and Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocates.

versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Sriharsha Peechara, SC alongwith Ms.

Devika Mohan, ASC, Ms.

Harshita Gupta and Mr. Shubham Mishra, Advocates.

Mr Amit Sinha, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

O R D E R

% 09.07.2024 1.

The petitioner is a street vendor and has filed the present petition inter alia praying that directions be issued to respondent no.2 to allocate any vending site to the petitioner.

2.

The petitioner claims that she has been carrying on vending activities at the site described as 'Near Gate No.1, Palika Bazar, Delhi'. Petitioner claims that she has been carrying on her vending activities from the said site since 1997. The petitioner's name is also mentioned in the list of 628 vendors who were considered eligible for allotment of spaces in the NDMC area in the year 2012 for the purpose of carrying out vending activities. 3.

The area of Rajiv Chowk and Indira Chowk have been declared as no-hawking/no-vending zones as per the scheme prepared in the year 2007 and thus the petitioner has been unable to carry on vending activities in the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

said area.

4.

The petitioner has produced challans to substantiate her claim that she was carrying on vending activities at the given site. However, it is noticed that the last challan as annexed with the petition was issued in the year 2016. 5.

Mr. Peechara, learned counsel appearing on behalf of New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC)/respondent no.1 submits that the petitioner has not been vending at the given site since at least 8 years and there is no evidence or material on record to substantiate the petitioner's claim of carrying on vending activities from the said site near Palika Bazar during this period.

6.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner's livelihood depends on carrying on vending activities. It is thus essential that the respondents indicate some alternate area from where the petitioner can carry on her vending activities. 7.

We find merit in respondent no.1's contention that there is no material on record to indicate that the petitioner has been carrying on vending activities at the site referred to in the petition since the past 8 years. However, in view of the challan supplied by the petitioner, it is also clear that the petitioner was carrying on vending activities near Palika Bazar at least till the year 2016.

8.

In the given circumstances, we consider it apposite to permit the petitioner to file an application with the concerned authorities for seeking allotment of any area where she can carry on her vending activities in accordance with the given norms [Open To Sky 6X4 feet]. 9.

If any such application is filed within a period of 2 weeks from date, we request the concerned authorities to consider the same within a period of The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

4 weeks thereafter.

10.

The present petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 11.

It is needless to state that any such allocation would be purely on temporary basis till the vending plan is being prepared in accordance with Section 21 of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J SACHIN DATTA, J JULY 9, 2024 RK The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.