Ram Rahish v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation And ANR.

$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 9468/2017 RAM RAHISH ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Gyan Prakash, Adv.

versus SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANR.

..... Respondents Through Mr. Sri Harsha Peechara, Standing Counsel with Ms. Vidhi Jain, Adv.

for SDMC.

Mr. Satyakam, Addl. Standing Counsel for NCT Delhi with S.I.

Anuj, P.S. Okhla Industrial Area.

Mr. Amar Singh, Adv. for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

O R D E R

% 27.10.2017 Present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondents not disturb his peaceful continuation of hawking, vending, squatting or any other similar activities without his removal from the site situated at opposite Vasant Vihar Depot, Munirka Village, Delhi, and not to harass him, till the issuance of Certificate of Vending to him, as envisaged under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, after framing of bye-laws and conducting survey and also till the Town Vending Committees becomes operative and functional.

Petitioner claims to be vending since the year 2014 and at present he is

vending opposite Vasant Vihar Depot, Munirka Village, Delhi. Mr.Gyan Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the respondents are depriving the petitioner of his livelihood by consistently harassing him.

Learned counsels for the respondents enter appearance on an advance copy. Mr.Peechara, learned counsel for respondent no.1, submits that petitioner is not a regular street vendor. Counsel for respondent no.1 has drawn the attention of the Court to pages 66 and 67 of the paper book to show that petitioner is vending on the road and obstructing the parking area/free flow of traffic and free movement of pedestrians.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will not vend on the road and will look for some other area in the same locality so that free flow of the traffic is not obstructed. Counsel submits that, at this stage, present writ petition may be disposed of in view of above. Accordingly, in view of above present petition stands disposed of. C.M. No.38525/2017 (STAY) Application stands disposed of in view of the order passed in the writ petition.

G.S.SISTANI, J V. KAMESWAR RAO, J OCTOBER 27, 2017/ck/ W.P.(C) 9468/2017 2/2