ORDER

1. In Saudan Singh v. NOMC, AIR1992 SC 1153, JT1992 (2)SC 190, 1992 (1)SCALE679, (1992)2 SCC458 , [1992]2 SCR243 we laid down certain guidelines in paragraph 11 of the judgment concerning squatterslhawkers carrying on business activity in the area within the administrative control of MCD. The guidelines laid down were four in number, namely:

"(1) Persons who have been found squatting between 1970 and 1982 and whose names are contained in the survey report prepared after the survey conducted in 1982 will receive first priority for grant oftehbazari permission subject to the scrutiny of their claims.

(2) Insofar as casuallehbazari on weekly holidays, festivals/melas, etc., is concerned, as well as at the 67 weekly bazars held, persons availing of the said benefit will continue to be granted the casual or weekly tehbazari.

(3) Squatters who have started squatting/hawking in 1983 onwards and who were not found on the date of survey would also be considered for grant of open tehbazari of 6 x 4 subject to the production of proof of continuous squatting and proof of residence and nationality. Such squatters/hawkers would be granted open tehbazari subject to availability of space provided they have cleared the dues of the MCD; and

(4) Persons who do not fall within the aforesaid three categories would be permitted to apply for hawking licences under Section 420 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 and their applications would be considered on merit for permission to hawk -- not squat -- by moving in specified areas with their goods on their heads or on cycles. They will be entitled to hawk with their goods anywhere in the zone in respect of which they have been granted a licence. However, such permission will be subject to any restrictions that may be imposed by the residential associations of different colonies."

Pursuant to the said guidelines, the MCD issued public notices in newspapers and through hand bills, posters, etc., between the months of June and August 1992. In regard to the category of hawkers/squatters mentioned in the guidelines, the MCD has undertaken an exercise to complete the scrutiny expeditiously. In regard to hawkers/squatters falling under category (1), the MCD has divided them into two classes, namely, those who possess survey-report-receipt dated December 23, 1982 and those who do not possess that receipt but are in a position to tender evidence or proof of their squatting from 1970 to 1982. It is stated that the latter category will stand and will be treated and considered after the former. We would like to make it clear that they all belong to one category and this sub-classification is not warranted. Even in regard to those who do not possess the survey report receipt dated December 23, 1982 but tender satisfactory proof in regard to their squatting from 1970 to 1982 should be considered along with those who possess the receipt and be arranged in the order of their respective seniorities. We do not think that the sub-classification is necessary.

2. The MCD has also stated that no covered tehbazari/kiosks/stalls/ shops will be given to any person under the present scheme and only open-to-sky tehbazari on area admeasuring 6 x 4 would be permitted to eligible squatters and the seniority list will be prepared accordingly on submission of proof. Counsel for the squatters/hawkers contended that earlier covered tehbazarilkiosks/shops/stalls was permitted to some of them like Jai Jawan Stores, etc., and if by this procedure it is intended to disturb them that should not be permitted. We read this procedure only to mean that those who have not been expressly given such facility will not be given covered tehbazari/ kiosks/shops/stalls, etc., under the scheme which is being finalised. We would like to clarify that in the name of the procedure set out by the MCD, which they propose to follow to finalise claims, they would not be permitted to change the nature of the tehbazari of those, who have been expr