The court reinforced the necessity for local authorities to enforce no-vending schemes effectively, emphasizing zero tolerance for illegal encroachments and the importance of public spaces.

JUDGMENT :

Prathiba M. Singh, J.

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The prime locality of Connaught Place including Palika Bazaar is the subject matter of this petition. As always, the two stakeholders who have competing interests are the shopkeepers on the one hand and street vendors on the other.

3. A scheme had been prepared by the New Delhi Municipal Council (hereinafter, ‘NDMC’) way back in 2007 namely, ‘Scheme for Street Vendors in N.D.M.C Area’, declaring the areas namely, Connaught Place, Connaught Circus (i.e., Rajiv Chowk and Indira Chowk) as No-hawking and No vending areas. The relevant portion of the said scheme reads as under:

“Non-vending areas:-

4.2 In view of the fact that NDMC is a security sensitive area, no squatting shall be allowed on the roads and the areas specified hereunder:-

- The areas covered by Lutyens’ Bungalow Zone (LBZ) as specified in the Zonal Development Plan (Zone-D)

- Areas in Rajiv Chowk and Indira Chowk.

- Areas around Supreme Court, Chankyapuri Foreign Mission Area.

- Areas near the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Stations.

- However, in these areas, wherever the built up units like kiosks, stalls etc. have been constructed by NDMC, the same shall be allowed to continue. If Vending Committee feels that this area be extended, it can do so after issuing a public notice”

4. The said scheme was approved by the Supreme Court in its decision in Sudhir Madan & Ors. v. MCD & Ors, 2007 SCC OnLine SC 758 wherein vide judgment dated 17^th May, 2007, it was observed as under:

“28. The New Delhi Municipal Committee has also submitted its Scheme. We have considered the Scheme submitted before us. The area which falls under NDMC does not create problems such as those in the areas under MCD. However, in the said Scheme reference has been made to persons who do not have permission under Section 225 or licence under Section 330 of the NDMC Act, 1994 but who are unauthorisedly continuing to carry on business as hawkers/street vendors. They have been described as those who are “tolerated” in the NDMC area. We fail to understand why any person who violates the law should be tolerated. Either they should be compelled to obey the law or the law may be suitably amended, if it is found to create undue hardship. The problems need to be addressed by the legislature or the rule-making authority. We, therefore, observe that if it is felt that the persons who fall in this category require special protection, the Act may be suitably amended to cover their cases or else the number of such illegal squatters may increase from time to time.

29. There has been no serious objection to the Scheme submitted by NDMC which is a comprehensive scheme. Certain directions have, however, been sought for from this Court. We approve the Scheme submitted by NDMC.”

5. Thus, the declaration of these areas as no vending zones was approved by the Supreme Court. The said judgment has also been reiterated by various orders passed by the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court including in W.P.(C) 11669/2021, titled New Delhi Traders Association v. New Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors. whereby in order dated 11^th October, 2021, it was directed as under:

4. The petitioner – which is the association of traders of shop owners/operators in the Connaught Place (CP) area, i.e., Rajiv Chowk and Indira Chowk, have preferred the present writ petition to seek directions to the respondents to ensure that illegal hawking and squatting/ vending activities in No Hawking and No Vending areas of Connaught Place and Con