1
ITEM NO. 1 (J-1)
1. Name of the subject / project :
SCHEME FOR STREET VENDORS IN N.D.M.C. AREA
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
Vendors-2004”.
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.
2
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.
COUNCIL’S DECISION
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
Court.
4
SCHEME FOR STREET VENDORS IN N.D.M.C. AREA
“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
Authority;
5
(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)
BACKGROUND
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
6
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
7
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.
8
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;
9
(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
persons;
(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
10
Sub-CBD, District Centre, Community - As specified in the norms
Centre, Convenience Shopping Centre separately.
Govt. & Commercial Offices - 5-6 Units per 1,000
employees.
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
Schools
Primary - 3-4 Units
Secondary/Senior/Integrated - 5-6 Units
Parks
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
Project.
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
representatives:-
- 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.