By Alfred Rodriguez,2014-06-17 02:38
9 views 0


    ITEM NO. 1 (J-1)

1. Name of the subject / project :


2. Name of the department / departments concerned :

     Enforcement Department.

3. Brief history of the subject / project :

    In 1989, on the directions of the Supreme Court, the NDMC

    framed a scheme for allotment of space in the NDMC area.

    The Supreme Court of India in the case titled “Sudhir Madan v/s

    M.C.D. & Ors.” in its order dated 3/8-03-2006 has directed that the

    NDMC”s Scheme framed in 1989 may require revision in the light of

    changed circumstances and the “National Policy on Urban Street


4. Detailed proposal on the subject :

     The detailed proposal is placed at Annexure ‘I”. (See Pages 4-17)

5. Financial implications of the proposed project / subject :

     As the scheme for street vendors are being formulated under the

    direction of Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India, financial implication of the

    proposal is not a criterion.

6. Implementation schedule with timeliness for each stage

    including internal processing:

    As this is a matter of policy, NDMC will abide by the directions of

    the Hon‟ble Supreme Court for implementation.


7. Comments of the Finance Department on the subject :

    Since the item is to be placed before the Council under the

    directions of Hon‟ble Supreme Court, the matter was not placed before

    the Finance Deptt.

8. Comments of the Department on comments of Finance

    Department :

     Not applicable.

9. Legal implication on the subject / project :

    Since the item is to be placed before the Council under the

    directions of Hon‟ble Supreme Court, the matter was not placed before

    the Law Deptt.

10. Details of previous Council Resolutions, existing law of

    Parliament and Assembly on the subject :

     Council‟s Resolution was passed in 1989.

11. Comments of the Law Department on the subject / project :

     The scheme is drafted with the assistance of Law Department.

12. Comments of the Department on the comments of Law

    Department :

     Not applicable.

    3 13. Recommendations :

    The scheme is for approval of Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India.

14. Draft Resolution :

    Resolved by the Council that the scheme be placed before the

    Supreme Court for approval.


    Resolved by the Council that after suitably incorporating the

    suggestions of the Members, the Scheme may be filed before the Registry of ththe Supreme Court before 30 of April, 2006 for the approval of the Supreme




    “Sudhir Madan v/s M.C.D. The Supreme Court of India in the case titled

    & Ors.” in its order dated 3/8-03-2006 has directed that the NDMC”s Scheme

    framed in 1989 may require revision in the light of changed circumstances

    and the “National Policy on Urban Street Vendors-2004”. Broadly the Hon‟ble

    Supreme Court has directed NDMC to submit a scheme with such

    modifications as they propose to make, if any.; The comprehensive document

    should be placed before the Court containing the scheme; the manner of

    implementing of the scheme and the practical difficulties faced by the NDMC

    in implementing these schemes. The Court has further directed that the

    scheme need not be populist in its appeal but must be practical and

    consistent with the right of the citizens who have fundamental rights to these

    spaces and other public places provided by the State. Only if a space is

    available for hawkers and squatters without any difficulty or inconvenience to

    the citizens, the same may be allotted. Timings for hawking should also be

    decided. Trade to be allowed should be such that cleanliness is maintained.

1.1 A Scheme has, therefore, to be presented to the Supreme Court in

    accordance with the directions given by the Court, referred to above.

    The salient features of the directions can be summarized as under:-

    (i) The right to use the pathway, footpath etc. is that of the citizens;

    (ii) no hawker can claim a right to defeat the rights of other citizens;

    (iii) the hawkers are large in number, but the population of citizens

    is many times more than that of hawkers and, therefore, the

    fundamental rights of the citizens cannot be put in jeopardy by

    permitting hawkers and squatters to block roads, footpaths,

    public parks, etc.;

    (iv) consistent with the rights of citizens, if it is possible to provide

    any space to hawkers, squatters etc., that may be done

    consistent with the policy to be framed by the concerned



    (v) principles for deciding hawking and no hawking zone;

    (vi) nature of goods that can be sold by hawkers, squatters, etc. so

    that cleanliness is maintained and at the same time free flow of

    traffic and movement of pedestrians is not obstructed;

    (vii) the concept of starting hawking business early in the morning or

    late in the evening may have to be reconsidered in the light of

    recent developments in the city, particularly with the advent of

    Metro and progress made in widening roads for use by the

    ordinary citizens;

    (viii) the scheme need not be populist in its appeal, but must be

    practical and consistent with the rights of citizens, who have a

    fundamental right to use the roads, parks and other public

    conveniences provided by the State.

1.2 A copy of the Order of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Sudhir Madan‟s

    case is at Annexure-II. (See pages 18 - 26)


2. In 1989, on the directions of the Supreme Court, the NDMC framed a

    scheme for allotment of space in the NDMC area for squatters who were to be

    given tehbazari permission. The Supreme Court issued detailed guidelines for

    the identification of the persons eligible for squatting and identification of

    sites for squatting. The Court set up a Committee known as „Thareja

    Committee‟ for identification of eligible persons and identification of sites for squatting. This Committee, after detailed scrutiny of the applications,

    identified 760 persons as eligible for the benefit of the scheme. These

    identified persons were out of those who are continuously squatting in NDMC

    area from a period prior to 01.01.1988. The Committee also identified date of

    seniority of each squatter and identified the trade and space to be allotted.

    The Supreme Court after accepting the „Thareja Committee Report‟ set up

    another Committee for allotment of sites in the zone of squatting on the basis


    of three options given by them for the sites of squatting. This Allotment

    Committee identified about 725 persons for allotment of spaces on the

    identified sites on the basis of the three options given by the persons found

    eligible by „Thareja Committee‟. This report was accepted by the Supreme

    Court in September, 1999.

2.1 After acceptance of the reports by the Supreme Court, sites had to be

    changed due to security reasons. Reserve Bank of India authorities

    approached Supreme Court and requested that for security reasons, squatting

    should not be allowed near Reserve Bank Building. Squatters were shifted

    from the Central Secretariat complex and also from the sites required for

    flyovers or by the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation. Squatters were also shifted

    from Safdarjung Hospital sites under the directions of the High Court of Delhi.

2.2 Regulation of Squatting and hawking in NDMC area is an obligatory

    function. Permission for hawking and squatting has to be as per the

    provisions of Section 330 and 225 of NDMC Act, 1994. Section 330 provides

    for “Licenses for hawking articles etc., and reads as under:-

     “No person shall, without or otherwise than in conformity with the

    terms of a licence granted by the Chairperson in this behalf:-

     i.hawk or expose for sale in any place any article

    whatsoever whether it be for human consumption or not;

     ii.use in any place his skill in any handicraft or for

    rendering services to and for the convenience of the

    public for the purposes of gain or making a living.”

2.2.1 Squatting is permitted U/S 225 of NDMC Act. Under this provision, the

    Chairman can give a permission for squatting on payment of such fee in each

    case as he thinks fit.

2.3 A person who does not have a permission U/S 225 of the Act or a

    hawking licence U/S 330 of the Act, is an unauthorized squatter or


    unauthorized hawker and liable to removal from public roads, streets,

    footpaths, parks etc. under Section 226 of the Act, Chairperson may without

    notice cause removal of articles deposited in Public Streets etc. and Section

    369 (2) of the Act, provides for punishment for contravention of provisions of

    Section 225 (1) of the Act.

2.4 Authorized squatters:-

    Persons having permissions under Section 225 of the New Delhi

    Municipal Council Act, 1994 from the Chairperson are authorized squatters.

    These are the persons who have permission to squat in built up structures like

    kiosks, stalls, tharas and open spaces allotted by the NDMC and those

    identified by „Thareja Committee‟.

2.5 Authorized Hawkers

    Chairperson is issuing licenses U/S 330 of the Act for hawking in NDMC

    area. These licenses are issued on year-to-year basis. There have been claims

    by the hawkers that they should also be given fixed sites as some of them are

    too old and infirm and hence unable to hawk from place to place. Similar

    requests have also come from women and widows for permission to squat at

    fixed sites although they hold hawking licenses.

2.6 Unauthorized squatters and hawkers

    These are persons who have not been given permission under Section

    225 of the NDMC Act, 1994 for squatting and persons who do not have a

    hawking licence U/S 330 of the NDMC Act, 1994 but are squatting or hawking

    in the NDMC area without a permission or a licence. The NDMC has also

    “tolerated” migrants from Jammu & Kashmir. These persons do not have

    either a permission under Section 225 or a licence under Section 330 of the

    NDMC Act but are continuing to operate in the NDMC area without a

    permission or licence, as aforesaid. Action U/S 226 and Section 369 (2) can

    be initiated against them.


2.7 Thus there are three categories of persons operating in NDMC area:-

    - Category-1:- Those who were given permissions by the NDMC of its

    own or on the basis of Thareja Committee recommendation. These are

    deemed permission U/S 225 of the NDMC Act, 1994.

    - Category-2:- Hawkers who have been given licence under Section

    330 of the NDMC Act, 1994.

    - Category-3:- Persons who don‟t have permission under Section 225

    or licence under Section 330 but are continuing unauthorisedly in

    NDMC including categories such as J&K Migrants whose claims were

    not admitted but who have been “tolerated” in the NDMC area.

National Policy for Urban Street Vendors, 2004

3. In the year 2004, Ministry of Urban Affairs and Urban Poverty

    Alleviation, Govt. of India announced “National Policy for Urban Street

    Vendors”. This policy has defined a Street Vendor. The objective of the policy

    is to provide and promote a supportive environment for earning livelihoods to

    the Street Vendors, as well as ensure absence of congestion and maintenance

    of hygiene in public spaces and streets.

3.1 The policy paper provide for setting up of a “Vending Committee”

    which may consist of the representatives of the following:-

    - Municipal authority

    - Traffic and Local Police

    - Land owning authority

    - Associations (markets, traders, residents welfare)

    - Association of Street Vendors (static and mobile).

3.2 Functions of the Vending Committee shall include:-

    (i) Demarcation of vending and non-vending areas;


    (ii) Provision and identification of space for squatting and areas for

    hawking. Provision for space may include temporary

    designations as Vendor markets (e.g. as weekly markets) whose

    use at other time may be different (e.g. Public Parks, parking

    lots) etc.;

    (iii) Timing restrictions on the urban vending. It should correspond

    to needs of ensuring non-congestion of public spaces; (iv) Public hygiene and cleanliness; (v) Ensure continuation and upgradation of weekly markets; (vi) Quantitative norms i.e. where to allow, how many squatters or


    (vii) Qualitative guidelines:- This has to include - provision for solid waste disposals,

    - public toilets to maintain cleanliness;

    - Aesthetic design of mobile stalls/push carts;

    - Provision for electricity;

    - Provision for protective cover to protect their wares as well as

    themselves from heat, rain, dust etc.;

    (viii) Regulatory Process;

    (ix) Registration system;

    (x) Corrective mechanism against defiance by vendors; (xi) Collection of revenues and

    (xii) Monitoring mechanism.

3.3 On quantitative norms, the policy paper has referred to Master Plan for

    Delhi, 2001 (MPD-2001), which proposes to incorporate the informal sector in

    trade in the planned development of various zones. The norms are as under:-

Retail Trade Norms

    Central Business District - 3-3 Units per 10 formal shops


    Sub-CBD, District Centre, Community - As specified in the norms

    Centre, Convenience Shopping Centre separately.

    Govt. & Commercial Offices - 5-6 Units per 1,000


Wholesale Trade & Freight Complexes - 3-4 Units per 10 shops

    Hospital - 3-4 Units per 100 beds

    Bus Terminal - 1 Unit per 2 bus-bays


    Primary - 3-4 Units

    Secondary/Senior/Integrated - 5-6 Units


    Regional/District Parks - 8-10 Units at each major entry

    Neighbourhood parks - 2-3 Units

    Residential - 1 Unit/1000 population

    Industrial - 5-6 Units per 1000 employees

    Railway Terminus - To be based on surveys at the

    time of preparation of the


    NEW SCHEME FOR N.D.M.C.- 2006

4. A Vending Scheme incorporating the National Policy for Urban Street

    Vendors 2004 is, therefore, proposed to be implemented in NDMC area.

    4.1 Constitution of Vending Committee:- The Vending Committee has

    to be set up. The Committee shall consist of the following


    - A representative of the N.D.M.C.

    - A representative of the Traffic and Local Police.

    - A representative of the Land Owning Agency i.e. L&DO.

    - A representative of the Market Association when the space being

    selected at the market and representatives of Residents Welfare

    Association when the selection is for the residential colonies.

Report this document

For any questions or suggestions please email