Back
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
JASWANT SINGH, M.S.SAHOO, JJ
JITENDRA KUMAR SAHOO – Appellant
Versus
PREM CHAND CHOUDHARY – Respondent
CONTC/5263/2020
The Commissioner, Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation, Bhubaneswar, had complied with the directions passed by the court in the writ petition and there was no ground to pursue the contempt petition.
Headnote:
STREET VENDORS - REHABILITATION - COMPLIANCE
Fact of the Case:
70 street vendors filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus for rehabilitation under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 before evicting them from their present place of business.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the directions passed by it in the writ petition had been complied with and there was no ground to pursue the contempt petition.
Issues: Whether the Commissioner, Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation, Bhubaneswar, had complied with the directions passed by the court in the writ petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Commissioner, Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation, Bhubaneswar, had complied with the directions passed by the court in the writ petition and there was no ground to pursue the contempt petition.
Final Decision: The court dropped the contempt petition.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CONTC No. 5263 of 2020
Jitendra Kumar Sahoo and
Others
….
Petitioners
Mr. Srinivas Mohanty, Advocate
-versus-
Pramod Prusty, Zonal
Deputy Commissioner,
Bhubaneswar Municpal
Corporation, Bhubaneswar
….
Opp. Party
Mr. Lalatendu Samantaray, AGA
CORAM:
JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
JUSTICE M. S. SAHOO
Order No.
ORDER (Oral)
04.01.2022
03.
1. This matter is taken up by hybrid mode.
2. Seventy Petitioners claiming to be the street vendors
in the area At-left side of Vani Vihar to Maharsi
Chhaka, Near Sahid Nagar Durga Puja Samiti, Raupali
Chhaka, Sahidnagar Bhubaneswar, Khurda had filed
WP(C) No. 27425 of 2019 seeking a mandamus for
rehabilitation under the Street Vendors (Protection of
Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014
(in short ‘the Act, 2014’) before evicting them from their
present place of business. The said writ petition was
disposed of by the order dated 17.09.2019, with the
// 2 //
Page 2 of 3
direction
to
Opposite
Party
No.3-Commissioner,
Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation, Bhubaneswar,
Khurda to decide their claims under the Act, 2014, in
case they appear before him within a period of 15 days.
The
said
decision
was
to
be
taken
regarding
rehabilitation within a period of two months from the
date of their appearance. It is alleged that since the
needful was not done, the present CONTC has been
filed.
3.
Upon
notice,
a
compliance
affidavit
dated
17.11.2021
by
the
Commissioner,
Bhubaneswar
Municipal Corporation, Bhubaneswar, has been filed.
In the said affidavit, it is averred that in compliance of
the direction dated 17.09.2019, a detailed order dated
29.04.2021 has been passed, wherein, out of 17
Petitioners, 3 persons have been identified during the
survey, as to be the occupants of the area in question.
4. It is stated that the said identified persons shall be
rehabilitated in a vending zone as earmarked under the
Act, 2014.
5. Mr. B. K. Dash, counsel for the Opposite Party
submits that in view of the aforesaid order, remaining
14 persons, who have not been identified during the
survey having already filed separate writ petition,
nothing more would survive in the present CONTC.
// 3 //
Page 3 of 3
6. In view of the above, we find that the directions
passed by this Court have been complied with and
there is no ground to pursue the CONTC. Accordingly,
the CONTC is dropped.
(Jaswant Singh)
Judge
(M. S. Sahoo)
Judge
January 4th 2022
Cuttack
AKPradhan
