Delhi HC summons Police Commissioner, North MCD head over illegal encroachments

Justice Jasmeet Singh has said that the Municipal Corporation and Delhi Police have only selectively removed the encroachments which do not give permanent emancipation from the problem.

New Delhi:The Delhi High Court has summoned the Delhi Police Commissioner and the North Delhi Municipal Corporation Commissioner (NrMCD) on how they offer to deal with the illegal encroachments by the hawkers and vendors in Chandini Chowk. A bench headed by Justice Vipin Sanghi has ordered to appear in the court on February 28.

The bench was hearing the petition filed by the Chandini Chowk Sarv Vyapar Mandal.

Justice Jasmeet Singh has said that the Municipal Corporation and Delhi Police have only selectively removed the encroachments which do not give permanent emancipation from the problem.

The court states that the hawkers and vendors are also encroaching in the No Hawking and No Vending Zone, in such a situation, the Commissioner of Delhi Police and the Commissioner of North Delhi Municipal Corporation should appear personally and tell how to solve this problem.

During the hearing, the court had emphasized that the Street Vendors Act should be implemented properly. It also directed all the municipal corporations to plan street vending by following the Street Vendors Act.

During the hearing, advocate Sanjeev Ralli, appearing for the petitioners, made reference to the 1989 Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the judgment of Saudan Singh v. New Delhi Municipal Committee in which the Supreme Court had said that if the business carried on the footpath is regulated, then it cannot be removed on the ground that they are on the public pathways and roads.

Ralli said that doing business is a fundamental right but there should be a process of licensing for vending.

The court further states that people can barely walk on the pathways in Connaught Place or Nehru Place as its vendors have had thronged the place.

The court adds that it will consider the Street Vendors Act. The bench adds that they are not against the act as people visit general stores for their daily needs, not a mall, and eat street food. They do not support unnecessary crowds due to the vendors.