Back
2009 Supreme(Del) 455
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
AJIT PRAKASH SHAH,SANJIV KHANNA
MANUSHI SANGATHAN, DELHI - Appellant
Versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - Respondent
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.766 OF 2008
Decided On : 17-04-2009
Ms.Geeta Luthra, Ms.Indira Unninayal, Ms.Rukhsana Chaudhary, advocates.
Ms. Sangeeta Chandra, advocate for respondent no.1/DDA. Ms.Zubeda Begum, Ms.Sana, advocates for respondents-3&4. Mr.Ajay Arora & Mr.Kapil Dutta, advocates for respondent-MCD. Mr.Pankaj Batra, advocate for respondent no.5.
Headnote:Constitution of India, 1950 Article 19(1)(g) - National Policy on Urban Street Vendors, 2004 - Scheme of MCD for Squatters/Hawkers, 2007 - Problem of identifying and earmarking hawking and non-hawking areas Nehru Place declared as a no-hawking zone - Zero Tolerance Zone does not automatically mean zero or no hawking zone - Right to hawk by street vendors is guaranteed by the Constitution under Article 19(1)(g) but the same can be regulated and restricted in larger public interest - Street vending on its own by itself does not result in violation of law unless for justifiable and valid reasons hawking/street vending is prohibited or restricted in a particular area - Right of street vendors in Nehru place not examined - Direction given to DDA to continue with the pilot project - 67 vendors permitted to hawk in the area which was demarcated by DDA prior to their removal - Held that question whether Nehru Place should be declared a no hawking zone and the question of demarcating non-vending areas will be decided by the DDA after making reference to the Ward Vending Committee and on the basis of the directions issued by the Supreme Court and in terms of the Scheme of the MCD.
1. This intra Court Appeal is directedagainst judgment dated 4th September, 2008 dismissing Writ Petition (Civil) No. 9407/2007 filed by Manushi Sangathan, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as appellant-NGO, for short).
2. Nehru Place is a well known commercial district centre in South Delhi which was developed in early 1970. Hawkers were naturally attracted and have been hawking in Nehru Place since 1980s.
3. The appellant-NGO, by their letter dated 28th July, 2003 submitted a proposal for regulated, controlled and systematic hawking at Nehru Place supported by documents like survey report of Nehru Place vendors, a plan for model market for hawkers and a report by a professor in School of Planning and Architecture relating to Nehru Place. This study was commissioned by the Ministry of Urban Affairs. It was noticed that the total number of hawkers in Nehru Place was about 300 and alternative sites had been provided to 102 street vendors/hawkers but not others. 68 existing hawkers operating from Nehru place were to be covered by this proposal of regulated hawking.
4. Delhi Development Authority (DDA for short) responded to the said letter stating that the proposal given by the appellant NGO would have to be integrated with the redevelopment proposal finalized for Nehru Place by the architect consultant. Thereafter, some correspondence was exchanged and the issue of regulated hawking in Nehru Place was also taken up with the MCD. Approval was sought from Chief Vigilance Commissioner. The appellant- NGO, by their letter dated 13th May, 2005 submitted a list of street vendors/hawkers after carrying out a survey. It was stated that the list was verified in several meetings. It was also stated that the appellant-NGO shall undertake responsibility and ensure that the street vending was regulated and monitored as per code of conduct. Placement patterns/locations were earmarked. The said list gives names of 68 vendors along with goods being dealt with by them.
5. Finally, DDA by their letter dated 23rd January, 2006 informed the appellant-NGO that a joint inspection of Nehru Place was held on 17th January, 2006 regarding feasibility of construction/installation of stalls by vendors. The letter states that it was decided during inspection that DDA would provide list of markets where space was reserved for informal sector. The appellant NGO was given go ahead for further discussions with the Architecture Department regarding finalization of the proposal for hawking at Nehru Place.
6. On 3rd October, 2006 a meeting was held in the office of Vice Chairman, DDA and various issues were discussed. DDA in light of the said discussions decided to change their development policy and in future incorporate informal trade in building/shopping complexes. It was noticed in the meetings that there was some confusion about the list of hawkers/street vendors submitted by the appellant/NGO but that was sorted out. The Vice Chairman asked the appellant-NGO to forward list of 68 persons along with their identity cards. The Vice Chairman directed that confiscation of products of street vendors should be stopped. It appears that these cards were later on submitted. Thus a deliberate, considered and reflected decision to allow and permit regulated hawking under the appellant NGO was sanctioned.
7. The said agreed arrangement/pilot project continued for a period of more than one year. In December, 2007, the appellant NGO filed WP(C) no. 9407/2007, suspecting that on basis of an earlier decision dated 18th April, 2002 declaring Nehru Place as a non-tolerance zone, the hawkers under the pilot project may be removed. The appellant NGO relied upon the decision dated 3rd July, 2006 in W P (C) No. 10479/2006 titled Citizens for Justice Vs. Lt. Governor (NCT) Delhi & Ors. wherein a similar contention raised against the pilot project was rejected by a Division Bench of this court observing: “2. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that th
