DOC

SCHEME FOR STREET VENDORS IN N

By Alfred Rodriguez,2014-06-17 02:38
8 views 0
SCHEME FOR STREET VENDORS IN N ...

    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

    ident