IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.01.2022

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

W.P.No.1048 of 2022

R.Manikandan

...Petitioner

Vs.

The Chairperson /

Zonal Executive Engineer (Zone No.9),

(The Township Vending Committee)

Corporation of Chennai

Nungambakkam, Chennai 600034.

...Respondent

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus,

directing the Respondent to consider and pass orders on the

petitioner's representation dated 16.12.2021 as per the

provision of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood

Regulation) Act, 2014 and till such time not to disturb with the

running of the petitioner's bunk shop at near No.153, Wallace

Garden 2^nd Street, opposite to No.16/1, Laestrella Building,

Nungambakkam, Chennai 600034, wherein selling Tea, Coffee,

Snacks and other Food by using LPG gas stove.

For Petitioner : Mr.L.Chandrakumar

For Respondent

: Mrs.P.T.Rama Devi

Standing Counsel

ORDER

The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to

direct the Respondent to consider the representation submitted

by the writ petitioner dated 16.12.2021 under the provisions of

the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood Regulation) Act,

2014 and till such representation is considered the petitioner

shall not be disturbed from running the bunk shop.

2. Admittedly, the petitioner is running a bunk shop

without license or permission. He is running a bunk shop at near

No.153, Wallace Garden 2^nd Street, opposite to No.16/1,

Laestrella Building, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600034, for several

years. The petitioner states that he is selling Tea, Coffee,

Snacks and other Food items by using LPG gas stove. He is

earning a meagre sum to meet out his livelihood.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. The petitioner states that he has submitted a

representation before the Vending Committee for the purpose of

considering his case and seeking allotment of shop. The Vending

Committee is yet to take a decision in respect of the

representation submitted by the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner

is constrained to move the present writ petition.

4. The petitioner has encroached the public road and

therefore, this Court cannot grant any relief in the nature of

injunction forbearing the authorities from removing the

encroachments in order to regulate the Street Vending and to

protect the livelihood of those self employed people, the Act

was enacted and a Committee was constituted to regulate the

Street Vending business in the interest of public and to

maintain the roads from encroachments. The encroachments can

never be encouraged. Encroachments or installing of bunk shop in

public roads undoubtedly would cause traffic congestion and

inconvenience to the road users. Therefore, the authorities

competent are bound to initiate action in respect of such

encroachment and to restore free flow of traffic and public

roads made available for free usage of road users.

5. However, the petitioner states that he made a

representation to the Committee. The Committee constituted has

to consider the application by following the procedure as

contemplated and in the order of seniority and by considering

other aspects contemplated under the scheme for grant of

allotment to such people. Therefore, the case of the petitioner

is to be considered along with all other candidates, who are

also waiting for their redressal of grievances in the manner

known to law.

6. It is made clear that the Committee has to take a

decision impartially and in a fair manner by considering the

grievances of the eligible persons, who are longing to get

allotment of shops as per the scheme. Discrimination in any form

would re