SANJAY KAROL, N. KOTISWAR SINGH
Malkit Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U. T. , Chandigarh – Respondent
ORDER :
1. On 9th April 2026, we had passed a detailed order, recognising that the efforts made by the respondent-State had borne some fruit. It was observed that any act by the State ought to ensure that there is minimum disruption of livelihood with adequate sense of fairness and responsibility. If the zones are identified, the authorities must also give the vendors adequate support to relocate. It has to be recognised that such relocation disrupts the customers of a particular vendor and also deprives the residents of immediate or proximate access to such vendors. The State had been asked to file affidavits indicating information about existing vending zones and all other relevant details.
2. Vide order dated 5th May 2026, we had asked certain officials of the respondent-union territory to be present in Court namely (i) The Chairperson (Commissioner), Town Vending Committee, Chandigarh; (ii) The Chairperson, GRDRC, Chandigarh; and (iii) The Secretary, Local Government & Home, Chandigarh, with whom we freely interacted. We had also perused the note of the learned amicus curiae Mr. Anant Vijay Palli, senior counsel.
3. On the said date, an affidavit was filed by the Commissioner, Mun
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.