SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 31691

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Devan Ramachandran, J
PALPANDI, – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Advocates:
K.R.PRATHISH, T.CHANDRAPAL, SRI.ARUN THOMAS SC, SMT.AMMINIKUTTY SR.G.P

JUDGMENT

The petitioners, who are stated to be eking out their livelihood through small businesses within the territory of the Munnar Grama Panchayat, has approached this Court seeking a direction to respondents 2 to 5 not to evict them from their areas of business, recognizing them as “street vendors”. 2. However, pertinently the petitioners themselves admit that the provisions of the Kerala Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood, Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short), has not been implemented in the town area of Munnar Grama Panchayat; but seek that the competent Authority be directed to issue necessary notification for the same at the earliest.

3. It is thus luculent that the petitioners, on one hand, admit that the Act or the Scheme under it have not been made applicable in the area in question; while, on the other, they seek the protection of the said Scheme from being evicted.

4. Shri.Arun Thomas, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent – Munnar Grama Panchayat, affirmed that the “Act” or its Scheme have not been made applicable to the area where the petitioners are stated to be conducting their business and therefore,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top